According to the authors grading students on a single dimension does not adequately assess learning. For them, a grading plan should include elements such as class attendance and effort. When such a grading system is used, it is unfair to the students based on a number of factors.
First, when behavior is used to grade students, it does not connect with students’ understanding of the course or subject. In every learning institution, there are different approaches used to monitor and punish unwanted behavior (Close, 380). For this reason, bad behavior should be punished by the relevant bodies as opposed to being included as part of the grade. If behavior is included as part of the grade, it generally becomes difficult to understand and interpret that grade in a meaningful way (Allen, 222). A grade should be a fair reflection of the student’s understanding and knowledge about a given subject, and this should not be combined with elements such as discipline as this will be misleading.
Secondly, the use of these additional elements in determining a grade is based on the teacher’s “merged judgment” of these elements. This means that the teacher evaluates the student’s performances in these elements – behavior, efforts, interest etc- and assigns a collective score. For example, a student may be given grade B in a certain subject as opposed to grade A due to his low scores in other elements such as behavior and effort. Unfortunately, these factors are based on the merged judgment of the teacher and are not evident or explained in the final grade. A person looking at the student’s grade will not know which of these factors contributed to the final grade and the method used by the teacher in assigning scores to these elements. This gives a false impression of the student’s knowledge in that subject.
Finally, including these