MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23

MODULE 8

GRADING SYSTEMS and the GRADING SYSTEM of the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

LEARNING OUTCOMES

 Distinguish between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced grading; cumulative and averaging grading
system
 compute grades of students in various grade levels of serving DepED guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Assessment of student performance is essential in knowing how the student is progressing in a course (and,
incidentally, how a teacher is also performing with respect to the teaching process). The first step in assessment is,
of course, testing (either why some pencil-paper objective tests or by some performance based testing procedure)
followed by a decision to grade the performance of the student. Grading, therefore, is the next step after testing.
Over the course of several years, grading systems had been involved in different school systems all over the world.
In the American system, for instance, grades are expressed in terms of letters, A, B, B+, B-, C, C-, D or what is
referred to as a seven-point system. In Philippine colleges and universities the letters are replaced with numerical
values: 1, 1.25, 1.50, 1.75, 2.00, 2.5, 3.00 and 4.00 or an eight-point system. In basic education, grades are
expressed as percentage (of accomplishment) such as 80% or 75%. With the implementation of the K to 12 Basic
Education Curriculum, however, student's performance is expressed in terms of level of proficiency. Whatever be
the system of grading adopted, it is clear that there appears to be a need to convert raw score values into the
corresponding standard grading system. This Chapter is concerned with the underlying philosophy and mechanics of
converting raw score values into standard grading formats.

8.1. Norm-Referenced Grading

The most commonly used grading system falls under the category of norm-referenced grading. Norm-
referenced grading refers to a grading system for in a student's grade is placed in relation to the performance of a
group. Thus, in this system, a grade of 80 means that the student performed better than or same as 80% of the class
(or group). At first glance, there appears to be no problem with this type of grading system as it simply describes the
performance of a student with reference to a particular group of learners. The following example shows some of the
difficulties associated with norm-referenced grading:

Example: Consider the following two sets of scores in an English 1 class for two sections of ten students:

A = {30, 40, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85 }

B = {60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 90, 95, 100 }

In the first class, the student who got a raw score of 75 would get a grade of 80% while in the second class,
the same grade of 80% would correspond to a raw score of 90. Indeed, if the test used for the two classes are the
same it would be a rather "unfair" system of grading. A why student would opt to enroll in class A since it is easier
to get higher grades in that class than in the other class (class B).

The previous example illustrates one difficulty with using a norm-referenced grading system. This problem
is called the problem of equivalency. Does a grade of 80 and one class represent the same achievement level as
agreed of 80 in another class of the same subject? This problem is similar to the problem of trying to compare a
valedictorian from some remote rural high school with a Valedictorian from some very popular University in the
urban area. Does one expect the same level of competence for these two valedictorians?
1
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
As we have seen, norm-referenced grading systems are based on pre-established formula regarding the
percentage or ratio of students within a whole class who will be assigned each grade or mark. It is therefore known
in advance what percentage of the students would pass or fail a given course. For this reason, many openings to
norm-referenced grading aver that such a grading system does not advance the cause of education and contradicts
the principle of individual differences.

In norm-referenced grading, the students while they may work individually are actually in competition to
achieve a standard of performance that will classify them into the desired grade range. It essentially promotes
competition among students are pupils in the same class. A student or pupil who happens to enroll in a class of
gifted students in Mathematics will find that the norm-referenced grading system is rather worrisome. For example,
a teacher may establish a grading policy whereby the top 15 percent of students will receive a mark of excellent or
outstanding, which in a class of 100 enrolled students will be 15 persons. Such a grading policy is illustrated below:

1.0 (Excellent) = Top 15% of class

1.50 (Good) = Next 15% of class

2.0 (Average, Fair) = Next 45% of class

3.0 (Poor, Pass) = Next 15% of class

5.0 (Failure) = Bottom 10% of class

The underlying assumption in norm-referenced grading is that the students have abilities (as reflected in
their raw scores) that obey the normal distribution. The objective is to find out the best performers in this group.
Norm-referenced systems are most often used for screening selected student populations in conditions where it is
known that not all students can advance due to limitations such available places, jobs or other controlling factors.
For example, in the Philippine setting, since not all high school students can actually advance to college or
university level because of the financial constraints, the norm-referenced grading system can be applied.

Example: In a class of 100 students, the mean score in a test is 70 with a standard deviation of 5. Construct
a norm-referenced grading table that would have seven-grade scales and such that students scoring between plus or
minus one standard deviation from the mean receives an average grade.

Solution: The following intervals of rose course to grade equivalents are computed:

Raw Score Grade Equivalent Percentage

Below 55 Fail 1%
55-60 Marginal Pass 4%
61-65 Pass 11%
66-75 Average 68%
76-80 Above Average 11%
81-85 Very Good 4%
Above 85 Excellent 1%

Only a few of the teachers who use norm-referenced grading apply it with complete consistency. When a
teacher is faced with a particularly bright class, most of the time, he does not penalize good students for having the
bad log to enrol in a glass with a cohort of other very capable students even if the grading system says he should fail
a certain percentage of the class. On the other hand, it is also unlikely that a teacher would reduce them in grade four
a class when he observes a large portion of poor performing students just to save them from failure. A serious
problem with norm-referenced grading is that, no matter what the class level of knowledge and ability, and no
matter how much they learn, a predictable proportion of students will receive each grade. Since its essential purpose
is to sort students into categories based on relative performance, norm-referenced grading and evaluation is often
used to be that students for limited places in selective educational programs.
2
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
Norm-referenced grading indeed promotes competition to the extent that students will rather not help
fellow students because by doing so, the mean of the class would be raised and consequently it to be more difficult
to get higher grades. Similarly, students would do everything (legal) to pull down the scores of everyone else in
order to lower them and was assured him/her of higher grades on the curve.

A more subtle problem with norm-referenced grading is that a strict correspondence between the evaluation
methods used and the course instructional goals is not necessary to yield the required grade distribution. The specific
learning objectives of norm-referenced classes are often kept hidden, in part out of concern that instruction not "give
away" the test or the teachers' priorities, since this might tend to skew the curve. Since norm-referenced grading is
replete with problems, what alternatives have been devised for grading the students?

8.2. Criterion-Referenced Grading

Criterion-referenced grading systems are based on a fix criterion measure. There is a fix target and the
students must achieve the target in order to obtain a passing grade in a course regardless of how the other students in
the class perform. The scale does not change regardless of the quality, or lack thereof, of the students. For example,
in a class of 100 students using the table below, no one might get a grade of excellent if no one's course 98 above or
85 above depending on the criterion used. There is no fixed percentage of students who are expected to get the
various grades in criterion-referenced grading system.

1.00 (Excellent) = 98-100 or 85-100

1.50 (Good) = 88-97 or 80-84

2.00 (Fair) = 75-87 or 70-79

3.00 (Poor/Pass) = 65-74 or 60-69

5.00 (Failure) = below 65 or below 60

Criterion-referenced systems are often used in situations where the teachers are agreed on the meaning of a
"standard of performance" in a subject but the quality of the students is unknown or uneven; where the work
involves student collaboration or teamwork; and where there is no external driving factors such as needing to
systematically reduce a pool of eligible students.

Note that in the criterion-referenced grading system, students can help a fellow student in a group work
without necessarily worrying about lowering his grade in that course. This is because the criterion-referenced
grading system does not require the mean (of the class) as basis for distributing grades among the students. It is
therefore an ideal system to use in collaborative group work. When students are evaluated based on predefined
criteria, they are freed to collaborate with one another and with the instructor. With criterion-referenced grading, a
rich learning environment is to everyone's advantage, so students are awarded for finding ways to help each other,
and for contributing to class and small group discussions.

Since the criterion measure used in criterion-referenced grading is a measure that ultimately rests with the
teacher, it is logical to ask: What prevents teachers who use criterion-referenced grading from setting the
performance criteria so that everyone can pass with ease? There are a variety of measures used to prevent this
situation from ever happening in the grading system. First, the criterion should not be based on only one teacher's
opinion or standard. It should be collaboratively arrived at. A group of teachers teaching the same subject must set
the criterion together. Second, once the criterion is established, it must be made publicly and open to public scrutiny
so that it does not become arbitrary and subject to the whims and caprices of the teacher.

3
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23

8.3. Four Questions in Grading

Marinila D. Svinicki (2007) of the Center for Teaching Effectiveness of the University of Texas at Austin
poses four interviewing questions relative to grading. We reflect these questions here in this section and the
corresponding opinion of Ms. Svinicki for your own reflection:

1. Should grades reflect absolute achievement level or achievement relative to others in the same class?
2. Should grades reflect achievement only or non-academic components such as attitude, speed and
diligence?
3. Should grades report status to achieved or amount of growth?
4. How can several grades on diverse skills combined to give a single mark?

8.4. What Should Go Into a Student's Grade

The grading system an instructor selects reflects his or her educational philosophy. There are no right or
wrong systems, only systems which accomplish different objectives. The following are questions which an
instructor may want to answer when choosing what will go into a student's grade.

1. Should grades reflect absolute achievement level or achievement relative to others in the same class?

t below his is often referred to as the controversy between norm-referenced vs. criterion-referenced
grading. In norm-referenced grading systems the letter grade a student receives is based on his or her standing in
class. A certain percentage of those at the top received A's, a specified percent of the next highest grades receive B's
and so on. Thus an outside person, looking at the grades, can decide which student in that group performed best
under those circumstances. Such a system also takes into account circumstances beyond the students' control which
might adversely affect grades, such as poor teaching, bad tests or unexpected problems arising for the entire class.
Presumably, these would affect all the students equally, so all performance would drop but the relative standing
would stay the same.

On the other hand, under such a system, an outside elevator has little additional information about what a student
actually knows since that will vary with the class. A student who has learned an average amount in a glass of
geniuses will probably no more than a student who is average in a class of low ability. Unless the instructor provides
more information than just the grade the external user of the grade is poorly informed.

The system also assumes sufficient variability among student performances that the difference in learning
between them justifies giving different grades. This may be true in large beginning classes, but is a shaky
assumption where the student population is a homogeneous such as in upper division classes.

The other most common grading system is the criterion-referenced system. In this case the instructor sets a
standard of performance against which the students' actual performance is measured. All students achieving a given
level receive the grade assigned to that level regardless of how many in the class receive the same grade. An outside
evaluator, looking at the grade, knows only that the student has reached a certain level or set of objectives. The
usefulness of that information to the outsider will depend on how much information he or she is given on what
behavior is represented by that grade. The grade, however, will always mean the same thing and will not vary from
class to class. A possible problem with this is that outside factors such as those discussed under norm-referenced
grading might influence the entire class and performance may drop. in such a case student would receive lower
grades unless the instructor made special allowances for the circumstances.

4
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
A second problem is that criterion-referenced grading does not provide "selection" information. There is no
way to tell from the grading who the "best" students are, only that certain students have achieved certain levels.
Whether one views this as positive or negative will depend on one's individual philosophy.

An advantage of this system is that the criteria for various grades are known from the beginning. This
allows the student to take some responsibility for the level at which he or she is going to perform. Although this
might result in some students working below their potential, it usually inspires students to work for a high grade. the
instructor is ten faced with the dilemma of a lot of students receiving high grades. Some people view this as a
problem.

A positive aspect of this foreknowledge is that much of the uncertainty which often accompanies grading
for students is eliminated. Since they can plot their own progress toward the desired grade, the students have little
uncertainty about where they stand.

2. Should grades reflect achievement only or non-academic components such as attitude, speed and diligence?

It is a very common practice to incorporate such things as turning in assignments on time into the overall
grade in a course, primarily because the need to motivate students to get their work done is a real problem for
instructors. Also it may be appropriate to the selection function of grading that such values as timelines and
diligence be reflected in the grades. External users of the grades may be interpreting the mark to include such factors
as attitude and compliance in addition to competence in the material.

The primary problem with such inclusion is that it makes grades even more ambiguous than they already
are. It is very difficult to assess these nebulous traits accurately or consistently. Instructors must use real caution
when incorporating such value judgements into final grades assignment. Two steps instructors should take are (1) it
make students aware of this possibility well in advance of grade assignment and (2) to make clear what behavior is
included in such qualities as promote completion if work and neatness or completeness.

3. Should grades report status to achieved or amount of growth?

This is a particularly difficult question to answer. In many beginning classes, the background of the
students is so varied that some students can achieve the end objectives with little or no trouble while others with
weak backgrounds will work twice as hard and still achieve only half as much. This dilemma results from the same
problem as the previous question, that is, the feeling that we should be rewarding or punishing effort or attitude as
well as knowledge gained.

A positive aspect of this foreknowledge is that much of the uncertainty which often accompanies grading
for students is eliminated. Since they can plot their own progress toward the desired grade. The students have little
uncertainty about where they stand.

There are many problems with "growth" measures as basis for change, most of them being related, to
statistical artefacts. In some cases the ability to accurately measure entering and exiting levels is shaky enough to
argue against change as a basis for grading. Also many courses are prerequisite to later courses and, therefore, are
intended to provide the foundation for those courses. "Growth" scores in this case would be disastrous.

Nevertheless, there is much to be said in favor of "growth" as a component in grading. We would like to
encourage hard work and effort and to acknowledge the existence of different abilities. Unfortunately, there is no
easy answer to this question. Each instructor must review his or her own philosophy and content to determine if such
factors are valid components of the grade.

4. How can several grades on diverse skills combined to give a single mark?

The basic answer is that they can't really. The results if instruction is so varied that the single mark is really
a "Rube Goldberg" as far as indicating what a student has achieved. It would be most desirable to be able to give

5
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
multiple marks, one for each of the variety of skills which are learned. There are, of course, many problems with
such a proposal. It would complicate an already complicated task. There might not be enough evidence to reliably
grade any one skill. The "halo" effect of good performance in one area could spill over into others. And finally, most
outsiders are looking for only one overall classification of each person so that they can choose the "best". Our
system requires that we produce one mark. Therefore, it is worth our while to see how that can be done even though
currently the system does not lend itself to any satisfactory answers.

8.5. Standardized Test Scoring

Test standard deviation is a process by which teacher or researcher-made tests are validated and item
analyzed. After a thorough process of validation, the test characteristics are established. These characteristics
include: test validity, test reliability, test difficulty level and other characteristics as previously discussed. Each
standardized test uses its own mathematical scoring system derived by the publisher and administrators, and these do
not bear any relationship to academic grading systems. Standardized tests are psychometrics instruments whose
scoring systems are developed by norming the test using national samples of test-takers, centering the scoring
formula to assure that the likely score distribution describes a normal curve when graphed, and then using the
resulting scoring system uniformly in a manner resembling a criterion-referenced approach. If you are interested in
understanding and interpreting the scoring system of a specific standardized test, refer to the policies of the test's
producers.

8.6. Cumulative and Averaging Systems of Grading

In the Philippines, there are two types of grading system used: the averaging and the cumulative grading
systems. In the averaging system, the grade of a student on a particular grading period equals the average of the
grades obtained in the prior grading periods and the current grading period. In the cumulative grading system, the
grade of a student in a grading period equals his current grading period grade which is assumed to have the
cumulative effects of the previous grading periods. In which grading system would there be more fluctuations
observed in the students' grades? How do these systems relate with other norm or criterion-referenced grading?

8.7. Policy Guidelines on Classroom Assessment for the Kto12 Basic Education, DepED Order No. 8, s. 2015

Below are some of the highlights of the new K to 12 grading system which was implemented starting SY
2015- 2016. These are all lifted from DepED order No. 8, s. 2015

Weights of the Components for the Different Grade Levels and Subjects

The student's grade is a function of the three components: 1) written work, 2) performance tasks and 3)
quarterly assessment. The percentages vary across clusters of subjects. Language, Araling Panlipunan (AP) and
Edukasyon sa Pagpapahalaga (ESP) belong to one cluster and have the same grade percentages for written work,
performance tasks and quarterly assessment. Science and Math are another cluster with the same component
percentages. Music, Arts, Physical Education and Health (MAPEH) make up the third cluster with same
component percentages. Among the three components, performance tasks are given the largest percentages. This
means that the emphasis on assessment is on application of concepts learned.

Table 4. Weights of the Components for Grades 1-10

Components Languages AP EsP Science Math MAPEH EPP/TLE

Written Work 30% 40% 20%

1 to 10 Performance 50% 40% 60%

Tasks

Quarterly 20% 20% 20%

6
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
Assessment

Table 5 presents the weights of the components for the Senior High School subjects which are grouped into
1) core subjects, 2) all other subjects (applied and specialization) and work immersion of the academic track and 3)
all other subjects (applied and specialization) and work/ immersion/ research/ exhibit/ performance. An analysis of
the figures reveals that among the components, performance tasks have the highest percentage contribution to the
grade. This means that DepED's grading system consistently puts most emphasis on application of learned concepts
and skills.

Table 5. Weights of the Components for SHS

Academic Track Technical-Vocational and Livelihood

(TVL)/ Sports/ Arts and Design
Track
Work
Immersion/Res
All other earch/ Business Work
subjects Enterprise All other Immersion/Resear
Core
Simulation/ subjects ch/ Exhibit/
Subjects
Exhibit/ Performance
Performance

Written Work 25% 25% 35% 20%

11 to 12

Performance 50% 45% 40% 60%

Tasks

Quarterly
Assessment
25% 30% 25% 20%

8.8. Steps in Grade Computation

Based on the same DepED Order(8, s. 2015), here are the steps to follow in computing grades.

Table 6. Steps for Computing Grades

STEPS EXAMPLE
Learner's Raw Score Highest Possible Score
Written Work 1 18 20
Written Work 2 22 25
Written Work 3 20 20
Written Work 4 17 20
Written Work 5 23 25
Written Work 6 26 30
Written Work 7 19 20

7
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23

1. Get the total score Total 145 160

for each component.
Learner's Raw Score Highest Possible Score
Performance Task 1 12 15
Performance Task 2 13 15
Performance Task 3 19 25
Performance Task 4 15 20
Performance Task 5 16 20
Performance Task 6 25 25
Total 100 129
Learner's Raw Score Highest Possible Score
Quarterly Assessment 40 50

2. Divide the total

raw score by the
Percentage Score (PS) =
[ ]145
160
X 100 %

highest possible score

then multiply the PS of Written Score is 90.63.
quotient by 100%
Percentage Score (PS) =
[ ]100
120
X 100 %

PS of Performance Task is 83.3.

Percentage Score (PS) =

[ ]40
50
X 100 %

PS of Quarterly Assessment is 80.00.

3. Convert Written Work for English Grade 4 is 30%
percentage scores to Weighted Score [WS] = 90.63 x 0.30
weighted scores. The Weighted Score of Written Work is 27.19.
Multiply the
percentage score by Performance Tasks for English Grade 4 is 50%
the weight of the Weighted Score [WS] = 83.33 x 0.50
component indicated The Weighted Score of Performance Task is 41.67.
in Table 4 and Table
5. Quarterly Assessment for English Grade 4 is 20%
Weighted Score [WS] = 80.00 x 0.20
The Weighted Score of Quarterly Assessment is 16.

(The scores can be found in the sample class record on Table 6)

4. Add the weighted Component Weighted Score

scores of each Written Work = 27.19
component. The Performance Tasks = 41.67
result will be the Quarterly Assessment = 16.00
initial grade.
TOTAL 84. 86
The Initial Grade is 84.86
5. Transmute the
initial grade using The Initial Grade is 84.86
transmutation table in
Appendix B. The Transmuted Grade is 90.

The Quarterly Grade in English for the 1st Quarter is 90.

8
gemmafagustin
 MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23

This is reflected in the Report Card.

For MAPEH, individual grades are given to each area, namely, Music, Arts, Physical Education and Health. The
quarterly grade for MAPEH is the average of the quarterly grades in four areas

GQ for Music +GQ for Arts+GQ for PE+GQ for HEALTH

Quarterly Grade (GQ) for MAPEH =
4

8.9. Grade Computation

What follows is a description of how grades are computed based on DepEd Order 8, s. 2015.

For Kindergarten

There are no numerical grades in Kindergarten. Descriptions of the learners' progress in the various
learning areas are represented using checklists and student portfolios. These are presented to the parents at the end of
each quarter for discussion. Additional guidelines on the Kindergarten program will be issued.

For Grades 1-10

The average of Quarterly Grades (QG) produces the Final Grade.

(Insert Table)
Final Grade by Learning Area =
1 st−quarter grade +2 nd−quarter grade +3 rd−quarter grade +4 th−quarter grade
4

The General Average is computed by dividing the sum of all final grades by the total number of learning areas. Each
learning areA has equal weight .

General Average =
∑ of FinalGrades ofAll Learning
Total numberofLearning Areas∈aGrade Level

The Final Grade in each learning are and the General Average are reported as whole numbers. Table 7
shows an example of the Final Grades of the different learning areas and General Average of a Grade 4 student.

Table 7. Final Grades and General Average

Learning Area Quarter Final Grade

1 2 3 4
Filipino
80 89 86 84 85
English
89 90 92 87 90

9
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
Mathematics
82 85 83 83 83
Science
86 87 85 84 86
Araling Panlipunan
90 92 91 89 91
Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao
89 93 90 88 90
Edukasyong Pantahanan at
Pangkabuhayan 80 81 84 79 81

MAPEH
85 86 85 84 85
General Average 86

For Grades 11 and 12

The two quarters determine the Final Grade in a semester. Table 9 shows an example in Grade 11, second
semester for the Accounting, Business, and Management (ABM) strand.

Table 8. Grade 11, 2nd Semester of ABM Strand

Quarter Second Semester

Subjects
Final Grade
3 4
Core Subjects
Reading and Writing Skills 80 83 82
Pagbasa at Pagsusuri ng Iba't Ibang
86 85 86
Teksto tungo sa Pananaliksik
Statistics and Probability 82 87 85
Physical Science 88 87 88
Physical Education and Health 90 88 89
Applied and Specialised Subjects
Empowerment Technologies: ICT for
80 83 82
Professional Tracks
Business Math 87 86 87
Organization and Management 85 81 83
Fundamentals of Accounting, Business
84 81 83
and Management
85
General Average
for the Semester

8.10. Reporting the Learners' Progress

The summary of learner progress is shown quarterly to parents and guardians through a parent-teacher
conference, in which the report card is discussed. The grading scale, with its corresponding descriptors, are in Table
9. Remarks are given at the end of the grade level.

Table 9. Descriptors, Grading Scale, and Remarks

DESCRIPTOR GRADING SCALES REMARKS

Outstanding 90-100 Passed

10
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
Very Satisfactory 85-89 Passed
Satisfactory 80-84 Passed
Fairly Satisfactory 75-79 Passed
Did Not Meet Expectations Below 75 Failed

Using the sample class record in Table 9, LEARNER A received an Initial Grade of 84.86 in English for the First
Quarter, which, when transmuted to a grade of 90, is equivalent to Outstanding. LEARNER B received a
transmuted grade of 88, which is equivalent to Very Satisfactory. LEARNER C received a grade of 71, which
means that the learner Did Not Meet Expectations un the First Quarter of Grade 4 English.

When a learner's raw scores are consistently below expectations in Written Work and Performance Tasks, the
learner's parents or guardians must be informed not later than the fifth week of that quarter. This will enable them to
help and guide their child to improve and prepare for the Quarterly Assessment. A learner who receives a grade
below 75 in any subject in a quarter must be given intervention through remediation and extra lessons from the
teacher/s of that subject.

8.11. Promotion and Retention at the End of the School Year

These are what DepED Order 8, s. 2015 say;

A Final Grade of 75 or higher in all learning areas allows the student to be promoted to the next level. Table 19
specifies the guidelines to be followed for learner promotion and retention.

Table 10. Learner Promotion and Retention

Requirements Decision
1. Final Grade of at least 75 in all Promoted to the next grade level
learning areas
Must pass remedial classes for learning areas with
For Grades 1 to 3
2. Did Not Meet Expectations in not failing mark to be promoted to the next grade level.
Learners
more than two learning areas. Otherwise the learner is retained in the same grade
level.
3. Did Not Meet Expectations in three Retained in the same grade level.
or more learning areas.
1. Final Grade of at least 75 in all Promoted to the next grade level
learning area
Must pass remedial classes for learning areas with
For Grades 4 to 10 failing mark to be promoted to the next grade level.
2. Did Not Meet Expectations in not
Learners Otherwise the learner is retained in the same grade
more than two learning areas.
level.

3. Did Not Meet Expectations in three Retained in the same grade level.
or more learning areas.

8.12. Alternative Grading Systems

Pass-Fail Systems. Other colleges and universities, faculties, schools, and institutions use pass-fail grading
systems in the Philippines, especially when the student's work to be evaluated is highly subjective (as in the fine arts
and music), there are no generally accepted standard gradations (as with independent studies), or the critical
requirement is meeting a single satisfactory standard (as in some professional examinations and practicum).

Non-Graded Evaluations. While not yet practice in the Philippine schools and institutions, non-graded
evaluations do not assign numeric or letter grades as a matter of policy. This practice is usually based on a belief that
11
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
grades introduce an inappropriate and distracting element of competition into the learning process, or that they are
not as meaningful as measures of intellectual growth and development as a carefully crafted faculty evaluation.
Many faculty, schools, and institutions that follow a no-grade policy will, if requested, produce grades or convert
their student evaluations into formulae acceptable to authorities who require traditional measures of performance

The process of deciding on a grading system is a very complex one. The problems face by an instructor
who tries to design a system which will be accurate and fair are common to any manager attempting to evaluate
those for whom he or she is responsible. The problems of teachers and students with regard to grading are almost
identical to those of administrators and faculty with regard to evaluation for promotion and tenure. The need for
completeness and objectivity felt by teachers and administrators must be balanced against the need for fairness and
clarity felt by students and faculty in their respective situations. The fact that the faculty member finds himself or
herself in both the position of evaluator and evaluated should help to make him or her more thoughtful about the
needs of each position.

8.13. Exercises

1. Define a Norm-Referenced grading. What are the issues that confront a teacher using a norm-referenced
grading system? Discuss

2. The following final grades are obtained in a class of Grade VI pupils:

80,81,82,83,84,80,81,79,77,88,83,89,90,91,90,78,79,82,91,92,90,

88,85,88,87,85,88,83,82,80,79,77,76,77,78,83,89,91,90,83,88,86,83,80

a. Using a norm-referenced grading with a seven-point scale, determine the scores that would get a
failing mark. What is your general impression in this?

b. Using a norm-referenced grading with an eight-point grading scale, determine the scores that
would get a failing mark. Compare this with the previous grading system above.

3. Define a criterion-referenced grading. What are some of the issues that confront a teacher using a norm-
referenced grading system.

4. Using the data in Problem b, set a passing criterion of 78 and set equal intervals for all other grades
above the passing criterion. How does your result compare with those of norm-referenced grading? In which grading
system do you feel more comfortable?

5. In a class of 100 pupils, the mean score in a test was determine to be 82 with a standard deviation of 7.
Construct an 8-point grading scale using the standard normal curve in a norm-referenced grading.

6. Discuss, in your own words; the four essential questions in grading provided by Svinicki. Do you agree
or disagree with her own points of view? Justify.

7. Would you use the norm-referenced grading system in your own class? why or why not?

8. When would a norm-referenced grading system be most appropriate to use? Similarly, when would a
criterion-referenced grading system be most appropriate to use?

9. Compute the grade of a student in:

a) Grade 9 English with the following raw scores

Written work - 80 out of 100

12
gemmafagustin
MODULE 8 ASSESSMENT IN LEARNING 1 1ST SEM AY 2022-23
Performance task - 60 out of 100

Score in Quarterly Test - 50 out of 100

b) Grade 11 student in Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person, a core subject in SHS with the
following raw scores:

Written work - 30 out of 50

Performance task - 42 out of 100

Score in Quarterly Test - 28 out of 40

c) Grade 3 student in the Mother Tongue subject: with the following raw scores:

Written work - 20 out of 30

Performance task - 25 out of 40

Score in Quarterly Test - 22 out of 30

13
gemmafagustin