CCSD Grading Reform Initiative

The Clark County School District (CCSD) is committed to student success by embodying the core values of equity, accountability, and high expectations for all students.

In an effort to reach goals set in Focus: 2024, CCSD’s five-year strategic plan, the Grading Reform Committee, composed of principals and members of various CCSD departments, in partnership with the Assessment, Accountability, Research, and School Improvement Division (AARSI) have led a grading reform initiative. The goal of these efforts is to ensure students’ grades more accurately reflect their knowledge and skills by minimizing the impact of non-academic factors by reporting these separately.

Students are still expected to meet deadlines and demonstrate appropriate behaviors; however, these actions will not be reflected in academic grades. Students will also have the opportunity to revise and/or retake assignments and tests to encourage continued academic growth in areas they may not have fully understood the first time. These changes will allow students to learn from mistakes and demonstrate mastery of content throughout the school year.

Throughout the process, five key priority areas have been identified to ensure equity, accuracy, and consistency in CCSD grading policies across all schools.

Priority Areas

  • Implement an equal (balanced) Grading Scale.
    • Grades 1-12
      • A = 90-100
      • B = 80-89
      • C = 70-79
      • D = 60-69
      • F = 50-59
    • Kindergarten Grading Scale
      • 2 = Meets
      • 1 = Approaches
    • Standards-Based Grading Scale
      • 4 = Exceeds
      • 3 = Meets
      • 2 = Approaches
      • 1 = Emergent
  • Remove behavior from the grading process.
    • Academic performance relative to the Nevada Academic Content Standards (NVACS) will be the only factor included in student grades.
    • Students will no longer be penalized through the academic grade for late work, participation, responsibility, etc.
    • Behaviors will be reported separately as a successful learner behavior or citizenship grade.
  • Implement a consistent reassessment policy to include opportunities for reflection, revision, and reassessment in order to ensure mastery of the NVACS/NVACS Connectors and District curriculum for all students.
  • Implement consistent weighting and categories in the Infinite Campus Grade Book for recording formative and summative assessments.
  • Implement standards-based reporting using proficiency levels at the secondary level.

Timeline

December 2020: Grading Reform Committee began discussions with school leaders

March - April 2021: AARSI held community input meetings on Grading Reform Initiative

June 10, 2021: Regulation revisions presented to the Board of School Trustees

July 8, 2021: Regulation revisions approved by the Board of School Trustees

August 2021: New grading regulation takes effect

2021-2022 School Year:

  • Implement an equal (balanced) Grading Scale.
  • Remove behavior from the grading process.
  • Implement consistent weighting and categories in the Infinite Campus Grade Book for recording formative and summative assessments.

2022-2023 School Year:

  • Implement a consistent reassessment policy to include opportunities for reflection, revision, and reassessment in order to ensure mastery of the NVACS/NVACS Connectors and District curriculum for all students.

2023-2024 School Year:

  • Implement standards-based reporting using proficiency levels at the secondary level.

Grading Regulation Comparison

Previous Grading Regulation New Grading Regulation
Kindergarten Grading Scale 2 - Meets
1 - Approaches
2 - Meets
1 - Approaches
Elementary (1-5) Grading Scale A - 90-100%
B - 80-89%
C - 70-79%
D - 60-69%
F - 0-59%
W - Working on standards below grade level
A - 90-100% Excellent
B - 80-89% Above Average
C - 70-79% Average
D - 60-69% Below Average
F - 50-59% Emergent
W - Working on standards below grade level
Elementary (K-5) Supplementary Grading Scale E - Exceeds standards
S - Meets standards
I - Approaching standards/Inconsistent
N - Does not meet standards
X -Is not presently being evaluated
E - Exceptional Progress
S - Satisfactory Progress
N - Needs Improvement
Secondary (6-12) Grading Scale A - 90-100% Excellent
B - 80-89% Above Average
C - 70-79% Average
D - 60-69% Below Average
F - 0-59% Failure
P - Passing (used for specific courses designated by Academic Unit)
A - 90-100% Excellent
B - 80-89% Above Average
C - 70-79% Average
D - 60-69% Below Average
F - 50-59% Emergent
P - Passing (used for specific courses designated by Academic Unit)
Secondary (6-12) Standards-Based Grading Scale No Existing Regulation 4 - Exceeds
3 - Meets
2 - Approaches
1  - Emergent
0 - No Evidence
Secondary (6-12) Citizenship O - Outstanding
S - Satisfactory
N - Needs Improvement
U - Unsatisfactory
O - Outstanding
S - Satisfactory
N - Needs Improvement
U - Unsatisfactory
Reassessment Policy No Existing Regulation Students shall have opportunities for reflection, revision, and reassessment in order to ensure mastery of the NVACS/NVACS Connectors and District curriculum for all students.
Late work No Existing Regulation Late assignments will be assigned an “L” in the grade book without an academic value attached until the work is submitted. Students who have provided no evidence of learning will be assigned an “M,” which carries a value of 50 percent.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: Why is CCSD making this change?
Answer: Students, educators, families, and administrators have been struggling with inconsistent grading policies when transitioning from school to school. The students of CCSD deserve an equitable grading system that accurately reports student achievement on the Nevada Academic Content Standards and supports all students being successful.

Question: What factors are being removed from students’ grades?
Answer: Students’ grades will be based solely on their attainment of academic standards. Learner behaviors, such as late work, missing work, and disrupting the classroom, will be removed from the academic grade and reported separately.

Question: How will schools report behavior issues on report cards?
Answer: Teachers will report academic grades and learner behavior grades separately on the progress report and report card. Learner behavior grades will be reported in the Successful Learner Behaviors section for elementary students and the Citizenship section for secondary students. Learner behavior grades will also need to be shared throughout the term just as academic grades are shared regularly with students and families.

Question: Do the changes make courses easier for students to pass?
Answer: No, the grading regulation changes actually hold students more accountable for their learning. The traditional grading system allowed students to focus on accumulating points rather than having to demonstrate mastery of standards. In the past, students had the option to accept an “F” for missing work rather than being held to the high expectation of having to do the missing work. Educators will explicitly teach and model college and career readiness expectations and elicit other forms of evidence to show a student’s current level of mastery in lieu of assigning low academic grades for behavioral missteps. Teachers who are unable to elicit evidence of learning will communicate progress as an “M” for no evidence.

Question: What is the timeline for the rollout of the new grading scale?
Answer: The new balanced grading scale will be implemented in August 2021.

Question: Is there a limit on how long students have to revise or retake assignments and tests?
Answer: Students who have not shown mastery (e.g., “D” or “F”) on an assessment will work with their teacher to develop a plan to show new learning has occured before reassessment. If a student does not submit the late work by the common school deadline established by the school and the teacher has been unsuccessful in eliciting evidence of the student’s learning, the “L” is changed to an “M” in the Grade Book and the score becomes a 50 percent due to no evidence.

Question: Will all tests and assignments be part of the reassessment policy?
Answer: Priority should be given to reassessing summative assessments (high weighting). Formative (low weighting) assessments/assignments are used to inform teaching. Educators will establish reassessment opportunities for students who have not shown mastery of identified standards, establish a timely opportunity for reteaching and relearning, and communicate expectations to students and families.

Question: How will late and missing assignments be marked in the Grade Book to provide accurate performance indicators?
Answer: When a student misses a deadline, the mark of “L” will be entered into the Infinite Campus Grade Book as a placeholder while the teacher works with the student to elicit evidence of learning. If a student does not submit the late work by the common school deadline established by the school and the teacher has been unsuccessful in eliciting evidence of the student’s learning, the “L” is changed to an “M” in the Grade Book and the score becomes a 50 percent due to no evidence.

Question: Will the new regulation require additional work from educators to regrade revised assignments?
Answer: No, implementation of the new grading regulations will change the work, not increase the workload. In reality, educators can determine how to best distribute their time. For example, educators can move away from grading everything students produce by providing effective feedback in lieu of a letter grade. Reassessment opportunities can be provided for summative assessments, which occur less often since summative assessments are given when mastery is expected.