wp.vcu.eduwp.vcu.edu/.../11/ResearchProposalPartIII_DTM-comments.docx · Web viewThe No-Zeros Policy; The Effects of Using a No-Zero Grading Policy Prior to a Standardized Test Introduction

Running Head: The No-Zeros Policy 1

The No-Zeros Policy; The Effects of Using a No-Zero Grading

Policy Prior to a Standardized Test

Liliana Bermejo

Virginia Commonwealth University

The No-Zeros Policy 2

The No-Zeros Policy; The Effects of Using a No-Zero Grading

Policy Prior to a Standardized Test

Introduction

The significance of grades in the education system in the United States of America is one

that cannot be neglected; students are graded in elementary, middle, and high school and

ultimately students’ grades impact their post-secondary opportunities. Grades decide what

university a student is able to attend, and the course of study. In our educational system, students

are graded on participation, homework, classwork, quizzes, assignments, standardized test, and

much more. Certainly, students pass and fail based on multiple factors such as completion of

assignment, effort placed on the graded work, and comprehension. All schools have a grading

policy in effect, whether it is A, B, C, D, F; 1,2,3,4; or 0%-100%; however there is a new

grading policy advancing in our educational system called No-Zeros Policy, also known as

minimum grading and Failure-Free grading. For the purpose of this paper, the term No-Zeros

Policy will be used to describe these types of policies. No-Zeros policy rejects the use of zeros

and instead allows teachers to give students a pre-established minimum grade.

Using zeros in grading has advantages and disadvantages. Proponents of grading policies

who utilize zeros emphasize that zeros provide a fair grade to students. Students who do not

complete an assignment deserve the zero grade compared to students who try hard but fail to

complete the assignment correctly. In other terms, giving a student an automatic 50, or other pre-

established grade, for not trying is unfair to the student who tried but received a 50 based on the

work handed in; much like a “free card”. On the other hand, as explained by Guskey (2009) there

are three problems with assigning zeros; the first being that zeros are rarely an accurate

representation of what a student learned or the student is able to do; the second is that assigning


zeros greatly magnifies when grades are averaged to attain student’s overall course grade making

it difficult for students to succeed with a high grade due to the skewed average; and lastly, zeros

cause students to withdraw from learning Furthermore, another issue at hand, is whether students

who undergo a No-Zeros Policy are prepared for their end of the year state assessment, which

measures their learning and scores their achievement for the year. This study will focus on

evaluating the latter.

Literature Review

In a study conducted by Watkins and Stevens (2013), the researchers created a No

Excuses Homework expectation rule in one rural Midwest high school, which overcame the

threat of losing state accreditation. The No Excuses homework reform involved three

components: homework was clearly defined as assignments that required time outside of the

classroom, students were required to revise work that did not meet the basic level of 70 percent,

and zeros were not allowed; instead students were given after-school tutorial time to complete

the homework (Watkins & Stevens, 2013). Although this study is not focused on a No-Zero

grading policy, Watkins’ and Stevens’ (2013) study demonstrates similar components to No-

Zero grading policies, such as establishing 70 percent as a minimum grade and neglecting the use

of zeros in homework assignments.

The researchers evaluated the No Excuses Homework expectation by placing a multiple

leveled consequence intervention; furthermore, researchers evaluated the expectation through a

collection of interviews and a focus group, which consisted of teachers from different content

areas and ranges of teaching experiences (Watkins & Stevens, 2013). During the interview, the

principal explained that teachers were giving zeros to students, “in hopes of helping students

understand the consequences of not doing acceptable work. Instead, ‘we [were] letting students


off the hook by accepting incomplete or missing work’”(Watkins & Stevens, 2013, p. 82). After

analyzing the interviews and focus group, the researchers discovered the quality homework

turned in improved with support and feedback from staff and home, and that the sense of

empowerment from teachers and parents continued to sustain the No Excuse reform (Watkins &

Stevens, 2013). Furthermore, Watkins and Stevens found that the high expectation for homework

quality set by the rule, positively impacted students’ academic performance (Watkins & Stevens,

2013). Students were improving their quality of work with support and honest feed from faculty

and home (Watkins & Stevens, 2013).

The study conducted by Watkins and Stevens (2013) demonstrates an issue that arises

from allowing teachers to give out zeros. Often, teachers use zeros as a punishment or

consequence for uncompleted work and lack of effort, rather than providing students with

additional support in their work. However, while the study does focus entirely on a homework

policy and contains similar components to a minimum grading policy, such as allowing students

to revise their work if it does not meet standards and fully explaining the expectations of the

assignment, this study relied heavily on parental involvement. The researchers explained that

teachers agreed most parents wanted to be informed and that they were informed when students

did not complete their homework and when students did an exceptional job on their homework

(Watkins & Stevens, 2013).

Similarly, principal, teachers, and staff members of West Carter Middle School recently

decided to abolish the use of zeros in student grading. West Carter Middle School, as explained

by an article found in Principal Leadership (2012), has 475 students between the grades of 6-8,

which 69% of those students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. The Failure-Free Zone,

implemented at West Carter Middle School starts with the principals when he receives a weekly


list of students with grades below 65% (Principal Leadership, 2012). Reasons behind the

students’ low grades are determined, such as attendance, test scores or missing assignments

(Principal Leadership, 2012). Then, the student’s parents are contacted and conferences are held

with the teacher, student and parent. After that, the students complete the missing assignment

and receive individual help from a tutor or staff member (Principal Leadership, 2012). Students

are given a timeline to complete the work; if students do not complete the work on their own or

with the tutor, students meet with the principal to complete the assignment (Principal

Leadership, 2012).

While the implementation of Failure-Free grading at West Carter Middle School is

working for the middle school since, the school went from one of the lowest performing schools

in Kentucky to a school with students “outperform[ing] 90% of the students in the state”, there is

a lack of quantitative evidence (Principal Leadership, 2012, p. 70). In order to measure the

effectiveness of the failure-free grading policy, data needs to show that students are benefitting.

Nonetheless, the components of the implementation such as the additional support and help

provided to students from teachers and staff is sanctioned.

In a different study by Carey and Carifio (2012), the researchers looked at seven years of

grading data from a large urban high school located in Massachusetts, which used minimum

grading. The quantitative study exposed claims that minimum grading contributes to overall

grade inflation and social promotion by analyzing the school’s statistics, rates, and percentages

of students’ grades (Carey & Carifio, 2012). The study monitored Mill City High School’s

school-wide minimum grading implementation, which involved assigning grades on a 100-point

percentage scale and averaging the set of grades from both quarters in a year (Carey & Carifio,

2012). While no specific minimum grade was explicitly detailed in the study, researchers


established that teachers had a predetermined minimum grade. Since no specific minimum grade

was detailed in the study, despite the researchers presuming there was one, this is a limitation to

the study.

This study found that overall the use of a minimum grading, statistically does not reveal

any grade inflation or social promotion (Carey & Carifio, 2012). Furthermore, the study

discovered that after minimum grading was taken place, “grades assigned to the struggling

students are still under-reporting the academic achievement of these struggling students when

compared to the grades assigned to their better-performing peers” (Carey & Carifio, 2012, p.

206). This finding addressed the criticism that No Zeros policies is an unfair grading system that

benefits some and not others.

While this study discovered significant findings, the lack of tracking for individual

teacher grading practices may be a limitation to the study. Researchers do not know why certain

low grades were assigned in the first place, in specifically whether it was assigned based on poor

performance, lack of compliance with teachers policies regarding homework, punctuality in

turning in assignments, or behavior in class (Carey & Carifio, 2012). The lack of a clear grading

practice for all teachers causes inconsistency between grading among students in the high school.

As previously mentioned, researchers claim a minimum grade was pre-established by the

teachers, but there is not report on what the minimum grade was, causing a limitation to the

findings of this study. Nonetheless, unlike the other two studies, which focused on providing

students with additional support instead of giving zeros, this study focused on evaluating whether

the use of minimum grading causes grade inflation and social promotion.

This current study will use the expectation set in Watkins and Stevens study, the

additional support for students used in the West Carter Middle School’s Failure Free grading


policy, and the findings of Carey and Carifio’s study to conduct a study that focuses on

implementing a grading policy in urban setting schools, where students are at high risk and there

is a minimal or lack of parental involvement.

Research Problem

Since there is minimal research on the effects of a No Zeros policy on students at risk in

urban setting schools, and in schools with lack of parental involvement, this study will measure

the effects of a No Zeros policy in such a setting. Furthermore, there is also a lack of research

directly linking standardized test, dictated by the state, to minimum grading policies, or No-Zero

policies. So, this current study will measure whether assigning a minimum grade, truly helps

students by evaluating the improvement, if any, on standardized testing after students undergo a

minimum grading policy the school year prior to taking the assessment.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to measure the passing and failing rates of students’ in

Virginia by collecting data from the Standards of Learning (SOLs), Virginia’s standardized test,

after students are under a No Zeros grading policy for a school year. Unlike previously

conducted research, this study will make a direct linkage between standardized testing, which are

a significant factor in students’ future, and students’ daily grading.

Research Questions

This study will address the following question:

Will students from Paul Louis Middle School (Louis M.S.), who undergo a No-Zeros

grading policy for a year, in their Math class demonstrate higher scores in the Math SOL,

compared to students from Marie Francis Middle School (Francis M.S.), who do not

undergo the No-Zeros grading policy for a year in their Math class?


Will students from Louis M.S., who undergo a No-Zeros grading policy for a year, in

their English class demonstrate higher scores in the English SOL, compared to students

from Francis M.S., who do not undergo a No-Zeros grading policy for a year in their

English class?

Hypotheses

Alternate Hypothesis: Students from Louis M.S. who underwent the No-Zero grading policy for

the year in their Math class demonstrate higher scores in the Math SOL, compared to students

from Francis M.S. who did not undergo the No-Zero grading policy.

OR

Alternate Hypothesis: Students from Louis M.S. who underwent the No-Zero grading policy for

the year in their English class demonstrate higher scores in the English SOL, compared to

students from Francis M.S., who do not undergo the No-Zero grading policy.

Null Hypothesis: Students from Louis M.S. who underwent the No-Zero grading policy for the

year in their Math class demonstrate no difference in scores in the Math SOL, compared to

students from Francis M.S.

OR

Null Hypothesis: Students from Louis M.S. who underwent the No-Zero grading policy for the

year in their English class demonstrate no difference in scores in the English SOL, compared to

students from Francis M.S.

Methodology

This study will focus on identifying the casual relationship between No-Zeros policies and

standardized tests; therefore this study will take the design of a quasi-experimental study. The


study will look at two middle schools, with students whom have similar demographics and

socioeconomic backgrounds, in the Commonwealth of Virginia. In order to protect schools’

privacy, an alias will be used for schools participating in the study. Elizabeth Francis Middle

School will serve as a control group and will not undergo the No-Zero policy; instead the policy

will be implemented in Paul Louis Middle School. The design of this study demonstrates

advantages and disadvantages to the researcher. An advantage to using a quasi-experimental

design to measure the relationship between No-Zeros policies and standardized tests is, the

ability to compare the results of one school from another and select the participants in the

experiment. Furthermore, this quasi-experimental design will allow researcher to directly control

the independent variable.

However, while there are advantages to using a quasi-experimental research design, this

design contains disadvantages. Since there are multiple factors that can affect student

achievement throughout the year, the multiple variables, such as diverse teacher instruction,

student’s effort throughout the school year, student’s personal interest in the subject being

taught, student motivation to succeed, and parental involvement enforcing effort and motivation,

may serve as limitations in the findings. In order to diminish diverse teacher instruction,

researcher will conduct a multiple regression analysis, prior to the implementation, through a

dummy variable. Another disadvantage to using a quasi-experimental design is the lack of

random assignment, which ensures that there are no pre-existing conditions influencing the

variables in the study.

The independent variable in this study is the No-Zeros grading policy. The No-Zeros policy

will consist of three components: the first is no zeros will be given to students on any

assignments, including homework, classwork, participation, exams, quizzes, report cards or


benchmarks. The second component of this policy is 50% will the pre-established minimum

grade across the Math and English classes undergoing the treatment. Unlike Carey & Carifio’s

study, which allowed teachers to establish their own grading practice and minimum grading, in

order to keep this study consistent, a minimum grade will be established for all teachers in the

experimental group. The last component is, teachers are to hold all students to high expectations

in all assignments, meaning students are allowed to revise their assignments, such as homework,

quizzes, exams, and other assignment, if students are content with their grade. Nonetheless, the

No-Zeros policy will not allow teachers to re-test students on benchmarks, SOLs or resubmit

scores marking period/report card grades due to researcher’s inability to control Virginia

Department of Education’s requirements.

Both student’s English and Math SOL scores are the dependent variable in this study. At

the end of the academic year, after students have undergone the No-Zero policy, SOL scores for

Math and English will be recorded. Student’s grades throughout the year, in the control and

experimental group, will be recorded on a daily basis, and will be reported on a monthly

document. The class average of students’ English and Math SOLs scores in Francis M.S. will be

compared to the class average of students’ scores Louis M.S. By collecting the English and Math

SOLs scores, from both middle schools, researchers will be able to show if there is a negative or

positive correlation between grading throughout the year and end-of-the-year assessments. This

is a criterion-referenced/standard-based test measure. Teacher instruction and student’s

previously acquired knowledge in Math and English may serve as a confounding variable, and

could possibly impact the research goals. In order to address this confounding variable,

researcher will account student’s previous SOL scores and compare with student’s SOL scores

after the treatment.


Population

The population for this study will be two middle schools in the Commonwealth of

Virginia. The two middle schools are located in the same city, same county, and are part of the

Virginia public school system. Louis M.S. and Francis M.S. are located in the Southside of the

city and have a population of students that are racially and socioeconomically similar. According

to Great Schools, Louis M.S. has a total of 79% African American, 16% Hispanic/Latino, and

5% White. Students participating in free or reduced price lunch in Louis M.S. is 86%.

According to Great Schools, Louis M.S. has a total of 72% African American, 23%

Hispanic/Latino, 2% White and 2% Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander. The percentage of students

participating in free or reduced-price lunch is 78%. The high percentage of students participating

in free or reduced-price lunch classifies the schools as a disadvantage and at risk school.

Furthermore, since the two schools are in the same district, students will learn the same

curriculum in both English and Math classes.

This study will use eight, 8th grade classes as the sample. Two Math and two English

classes at the 8th grade level will be chosen from Louis M.S. to undergo the No-Zeros policy; and

two Math and two English classes, as well, in Francis M.S. will be chosen. Purposeful and

convenience sampling will be used as the sampling method. Researcher will choose classes that

are not advanced or honors. Furthermore, classes undergoing the Math No-Zero grading policy

will not be the same students who undergo the English No-Zero policy in the middle school.

Therefore, the researcher will select classes with students that are demographically similar, in

gender, race and socioeconomic background.

Based on the sampling method chosen, there are some biases and threats evident. One of

threats is the amount of students in exceptional education, which require a special education


teacher in the classroom affecting the teacher and student ratio in a classroom, and the amount of

support all students receive. Therefore, in order to diminish this threat, classes in both middle

schools will be chosen with limited students in exceptional education, with similar class sizes,

and teacher to student ratio. Another bias is teachers’ knowing their students’ SOLs results will

be used to compare students’ grades throughout the year, causing teachers to instruction

differently. So, in order to diminish teacher biases, researchers will not disclose to middle

schools, teachers or students that SOL scores will be used to identify the correlation between

student achievement throughout the year and student achievement on the standardized test.

Furthermore, as a result of divergent teacher instruction, some teachers may already have an

incentive to teach in a manner that improves SOL scores. As previously stated, a multiple

regression analysis will be conducted with a dummy variable prior to conducting the research in

order to diminish such threats.

Data Analysis

Since researcher will be evaluating the use of the No-Zeros Policy in Louis M.S. and

collecting students’ SOL scores, then comparing class averages to students in Francis M.S.,

which is a different yet demographically similar school, researchers will use nonequivalent

groups, pre-test-post-test design as a data collection instrument. Before the research begins,

participants’ Math and English SOL scores, from the end of their 7th grade year, will be collected

and serve as a pre-test. The SOL scores after the treatment, at the end of their 8th grade year, will

serve as a post-test. Pre-test and post-test are similar, since they are both standardized, non-

repeated, and SOLs. This instrument was chosen in order to appropriately determine students’

prior knowledge before the treatment year, and to adequately determine the influence the No-

Zeros Policy has on the English and Math SOLs.


Since the pre-test and post-test are both SOL, which are standardized test created by the

Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) for Virginia Public Schools, the SOL’s reliability

and validity is outlined by the VDOE. Considering that the Virginia SOL is a secure test that is

not administrated twice, the VDOE has an internal consistency method to measure reliability.

Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha statistic is used as an estimate of internal consistency reliability as

well as the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) (Virginia Statewide Student Assessments

Technical Report, 2011). As explained in the Virginia Statewide Student Assessments Technical

Report, higher Cronback’s alpha values indicates a “greater proportion of observed score

variance is true score variance” (2011, p. 35). For the SEM measurement, the greater the

reliability the lower the SEM value is; and with a low SEM score there is more confidence in the

accuracy and precision of the observed test scores (Virginia Statewide Student Assessments

Technical Report, 2011).

In order to measure validity, which is the degree to which the SOL scores appropriately

show evidence of student’s performance throughout the year, the VDOE considers SOL’s

content and construct validity. Virginia’s SOL test blueprint is taken directly from the SOL

curriculum framework that school divisions and teachers use to develop an instructional program

for their students throughout the year (Virginia Statewide Student Assessments Technical

Report, 2011). Virginia Statewide Student Assessments Technical Report explains, the direct

relationship between the SOL curriculum frameworks, the SOL test blueprint and the SOL

assessment lends support to the content validity of the SOL assessments (2011, p. 40). Construct

validity is measure by the VDOE based on ongoing research. According to the Virginia

Statewide Student Assessments Technical Report, in content areas and grade levels, school pass

rates on the SOL test have been statistically correlated with national percentile ranks on the


Standard 9 and pass rates on the Literacy Passport Test (2011). Additionally, for current

assessments factor analyses are performed to evaluate construct validity.

The statistical test to be used to analyze the data collected will be an analysis of

covariance (ANCOVA). ANCOVA adjusts posttests scores statistically, “based on initial group

differences, which reduces the influence of that difference on the results” (McMillan, 2015, p.

295). Since this study uses a quasi-experimental design, where students in control and

experiment groups are different and are not randomly picked, an ANCOVA was selected because

it measures pre-intervention differences. Therefore, by using ANCOVA, researcher will have the

ability to analyze SOL scores statistically based on students’ prior SOL scores. The alpha

significance level for this study will be <05.

Delimitations

Since this study will implement the No-Zeros Policy on participants selected via

convenience sampling, in Louis M.S. in two English and Math classes, and use two English and

Math classes in Francis M.S. as control groups, it takes the form of a quasi-experimental design.

This study will be non-equivalent groups, pretest and post-test design. Since the pretest and post-

test are both SOL standardized tests from the Virginia Board of Education, and they serve as a

measurement for student learning throughout the year, the pretest and post-test demonstrate

validity and measuring students performance during the No-Zeros Policy.

There are two threats to internal validity, which is the extent to which the No-Zeros

Policy will produce the observed effect (McMillan, 2015). The two threats are history and

participant effect. A history threat is an unplanned and uncontrolled event that may influence the

dependent variable, in this case the English and Math SOL (McMillan, 2015). In this study, a

history threat is student absence during the day of the SOL exam, affecting the data collection of


SOL scores. However, in order to control such threat, students will be advised that their

attendance during the exam is crucial for the study, and for purposes beyond this study as well.

Furthermore, another history threat is student’s feelings during the day of the SOL testing.

Students may be sick, nervous or experiencing other feelings/emotions that may influence their

SOL scores. The second threat to internal validity is participant effect. In order to manage the

participant effect, in both groups, students will be notified of the study, of course due to ethical

reasons, but they will not be told that SOL scores will serve as a dependent variable.

Since this is a quasi-experimental design, in which participants of the study are not

randomly selected, selection bias is a threat to internal and external validity. For this study,

students are selected through purposeful and convenience sampling, since researcher is teaching

at Louis M.S. In order to control selection bias, researcher will choose classes that are not

advanced or honors, and will limit the amount of students in exceptional education. Additionally,

students in a school who undergo the English No-Zeros Policy will not undergo the Math No-

Zeros Policy. Although researcher will try to diminish selection bias, it is still a threat causing an

inability to generalize the findings. Since the purpose of this study is to increase research of No-

Zeros grading policies in at risk and urban setting schools, the results of this study should not be

generalized to all students since it looks at the affects of grading policies in two schools rather

than a variety of schools around the state. Furthermore, since this study only looks at two schools

in an urban location, there is a limitation to generalizing the results of this study due to the

setting of this study only consisting of specifc demographic populations.

The purpose of this study is to create a linkage between No-Zeros grading policies and

student’s end of the year performances. Since this study takes the form of a quasi-experimental

design, with non-equivalent groups that will be pre and post-tested, the research design will


enable researchers to measure whether assigning a No-Zeros Policy throughout a year helps

students score higher in end-of-the-year standardized tests. Therefore, choosing a quasi-

experimental design is strength in this study, since it allows researcher to directly measure the

grading policy effect and compare standardized scores to a control group. However a limitation

to the research design is measuring student achievement solely on standardized tests. Arguments

exist that standardized test should not be a sole measurement of a student’s achievement or

improvement throughout the year, since biases in the test may exist.

Some barriers or constraints that might exist in the research setting that would inhibit the

ability to conduct the research, is lack of teacher or administration support to be part of the study.

In order to improve the study, the amount of schools participating in the study could be

increased. By increasing the amount of schools undergoing the No-Zeros Policy, and the amount

of schools serving as control groups, a sharpened representation of the linkage between No-Zeros

grading policies and student achievement in standardized, end of the year assessment can be

made.


Reference Page

A Failure-Free Zone. (2012). Principal Leadership, 12(9), 70-75.

Carey, T., & Carifio, J. (2012). The minimum grading controversy: Results of a quantitative study of seven years of grading data from an urban high school. Educational Researcher, 41(6), 201-208. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/docview/1140128819?accountid=14780

Guskey, T. R. (2004). Are zeros your ultimate weapon? Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 70(3), 31-35. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/docview/62077065?accountid=14780

McMillan, James H. (2015) Educational Research: Fundamentals for the Consumer. Seventh Edition. Pearson Education, Inc.

Virginia Statewide Student Assessments Technical Report. (2011). Retrieved December 5, 2015, from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/testing/test_administration/technical_reports/sol_technical_report_2011-12_administration_cycle.pdf

Watkins, P. J., & Stevens, D. W. (2013). The goldilocks dilemma: Homework policy creating a culture where simply good is just not good enough. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 86(2), 80-85. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/docview/1509082976?accountid=14780

Welcome to GreatSchools. (n.d.). great schools.org

http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/docview/1509082976?accountid=14780

http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/docview/62077065?accountid=14780

Documents

wp.vcu.eduwp.vcu.edu/.../11/ResearchProposalPartIII_DTM-comments.docx · Web viewThe No-Zeros Policy; The Effects of Using a No-Zero Grading Policy Prior to a Standardized Test Introduction