Our Student Handbook illustrates grading policies and procedures in place in 2012-13. Interesting facets of our our policy at that time:
- Final grades were computed based on averaging quarterly percentage grades, including Quarterly Assessments computed at a schoolwide standard percentage. A "QA Exemption policy" tied exam exemptions to exemplary attendance.
- Several features of the LVHS 2012 grade policy were actually not that old. Just since the mid 1990s, for example... LVHS switched from a six-weeks grading period to a nine-weeks grading period. LVHS switched to calculating final grades via percentage, instead of points. (Previously, quarterly grades were converted from percentages to letter grades and from letter grades to points, which were then averaged to determine a final point value, converted back to a letter grade for a final report card) LVHS switched back to a "10-drop" percentage scale from a "7-drop" scale. (The A- cutoff moved from 93% to 90%).
Several grading reforms associated with our present grading policy were implemented in 2013-14. Among them were the following:
- Removal of grade penalties associated meant to punish students for discipline infractions, attendance, cheating and late work.
- Added language that allowed students to re-take tests or quizzes and re-submit written work.
- Creation of school-based consequences for not turning in work or completing formative assessments.
- Changed graduation honors from recognition of Valedictorian / Salutatorian (previously top two seniors by GPA) to the Latin Honors System.
- Specified a new method, in place for the 2014-15 school year, of choosing speaker(s) for commencement (Necessary because previous speakers were Valedictorian / Salutatorian).
Standards-based grading was introduced, school-wide, in 2014-15. Changes included:
- Defining "formative assessment" and "summative assessment" and stating clearly "formative assessment" would not be included in weighted grades.
- A student Bill of Assessment Rights that set clear expectations for teachers and students around assessment.
- Creation of a standardized four-level performance rating scale with basic definitions for each level.
- Implementation of 'standards-based' grade computation system in which final grades for classes are a weighted average of marks in the standards for each class, expressed as integers.
- Creation of a new 'grade scale' to allow the conversion of integer grades to letter grades for reporting / transcript purposes.
- Specifications for new computation methods for standard marks, to be used at teachers' discretion.
- Creation of schoolwide "College & Career Readiness Standards" and rubrics for each of the four standards, to be used for quarterly reporting in each class.
- Modification of reassessment and late work policies by course, each of which was classified into one of three tiers according to the general age and academic level of students in the courses.
- Slight tweaks in rules regarding the use of school-based consequences for students who turn in late work.
Modifications to parts of our grading system were implemented in 2015-16. Changes included:
- The addition of an "Academic Honesty" component within the College & Career Readiness standard category "Quality of Work."
- Specification for "Student Self-reflection" to be included as a component in determination of College & Career Readiness standards.
- Restrictions on late work and reassessment, shortening the timeline for each from the length of the course to 10 days in both cases among other modifications.
- Inclusion of a "Working Lunch" consequence for students who were "incomplete" in their classes.
Our third year of standards-based grading featured fewer changes, as evidenced in our 2016-17 student handbook. Changes included:
- Restrictions on late work and reassessment, shortening the timeline for each from 10 days to five days in both cases.
- Modification of our 2014-15 grade scale to increase the lowest "passing" integer from 2.0 to 2.1.
The 2017-18 student handbook reflects the next version of our grading policies, which were very similar to the 16-17 policies. Besides giving teachers a little more discretion in the use of consequences for late work and latitude to restrict reassessment, the only noteworthy change was to the grade scale, increasing the lowest "passing" integer from 2.1 to 2.2
2018-19 student handbook
2019-20 student handbook