Proportional grading shifts report card grades
Proportional grading has decreased the percentage of As, Fs, and Ds at CVHS, showing a major increase in Bs and a small increase in Cs at CVHS.
According to CVUSD, proportional grading is defined as a process for determining a student’s grade using an evenly distributed scale within a specified range. District officials regard it as an “equitable grading practice.”
Ethical grading practices include accuracy, bias resistance, and motivation. This means using practices that are mathematically sound, easy to understand, and accurately attesting to a student’s level of academic performance.
This is based on valid evidence of a student’s content knowledge, and not based on a teacher’s bias or a student’s environment. The practices aim to motivate students to achieve academic success, strive towards a growth mindset, and give students the opportunity for redemption, while being transparent and understandable.
“From an organizational standpoint, I find that proportional grading has greatly improved my teaching practices,” said English teacher Keanu Dasalla. “It allows for more clarity in terms of how I should be structuring my lessons and assessments, as well as what work students should be prioritizing, studying, and reassessing.”
In the policy implementation, teachers were given four grading systems to choose from. Option #1 being the Standard Proportional Grading Scale, otherwise known as “The 0.79 Scale.”
Option #2 was the Alternative Proportional Grading Scale, also known as “The 0.5 Scale.”
Option #3 was the Pre-Approved Alternative Proportional Grading Scale, which also goes by the name “Pre 25-26 Rubric.”
And lastly, Option #4 was presented as the Percentage Grading Scale 50-100%. This system was much newer and unfamiliar to many. Within this grading system, students can not obtain a score lower than 50%, even if the work is entirely missing.
From these options, among high school teachers as of August 2025, 31.7% chose option #1, 42.9% chose option #2, 2.8% chose option #3, and 22.6% chose option #4.
Transitioning from Spring 2025 to Fall 2025, there was a 3.7% decrease in As, 4.8% increase in Bs, 0.7% increase in Cs, 0.3% decrease in Ds, and 1.9% decrease in Fs.
This shows a larger decrease in the percentage of As than Ds and Fs combined. Yet, there is a larger increase in the percentage of Bs than the decrease in As.
From a released clip of the January CVUSD Board of Education meeting, former teacher Brian Foster spoke against proportional grading.
“Most failing students simply strive to work as little as necessary to earn passing credits with D- grades. Equity grading allows these students to do even less and still pass their courses,” said Foster.
Some students at CVHS shared a similar sentiment. “I believe that it prioritizes students’ passing rather than learning,” said senior Cooper Samson.
The majority of teachers leaned towards adopting the proportional grading scale rather than the percentage grading scale. This can explain a discrepancy in As as many students often complain how difficult it is to get an A in the Standard Proportional Grading scale system.
As CVUSD continues to evaluate proportional grading, its impact remains contested.
Thank you for citing the philosophical bases behind the adoption of equity grading. I encourage everyone to question whether or not those bases are accurate, valid, or true.
For example, this article states that under equity grading, grades are based on “valid evidence of a student’s content knowledge, and not based on a teacher’s bias or a student’s environment.” Ask yourself how a grading scale changes a what a teacher measures, removes teacher bias, or changes the student’s environment. In other words, an alternative interpretation of equity grading suggests no change except in the numeric scale. The real question should be “How do we best judge how well a student learns?” If we’re honest about it, that determination is truly an art, at least in the subjective classes like English and social studies.
Equity grading supporters cite mathematical evenness or purity of ranges, but why is such a grading scale automatically “right”? Why isn’t a pure exponential or algorithmic scale also right? The real question should be “which scale most closely mirrors the scale by which people are judged throughout life?” (Hint: you do the job at a high level to stay employed or you get fired.)
Finally, note that I also stated at the school board meeting that the top performing students can escape all of this nonsense by taking Advanced Placement (AP) courses, which should be celebrated as the height of academic achievement, which should be the #1 purpose of schools (sadly, that is not true). Note that AP test grading has a steep cliff: scores of 1-2 get nothing, zero, zip, nada (failing) while scores of 3-4-5 get full college credit.
I like how people are trying to improve their grades to A’s and B’s
I like this story a lot, it’s very informative and helps me understand this a lot more. I like how some grades are going up but I’m a bit disappointed that it’s not very accurate. It’s good that most people are getting B’s but the grading scale isn’t as accurate as it should be.
I think proportional grading punishes those with good grades, and rewards those without
Its better for people with Ds and Fs but worse for people trying to maintain As and Bs