top of page
Search

Grading: Education's Tug-Of-War

Hello,


Here’s a truth we can all agree on: most students want to do well in school. But as I explored in the last post, "Cooking the Books," what “doing well” means—and how we measure it—is often anything but simple.


Grades are supposed to communicate what students know and can do in relation to standards. But over time, they’ve taken on another role: motivation. Sure, we use grades to report learning—but we also use them to encourage behaviors like turning work in on time, participating in class, and coming prepared. The trouble is, once we use grades to motivate behavior, we modify the grade's meaning, causing funhouse mirror-like distortions--sometimes improving and more often worsening the way the grade looks.


Imagine this: A student consistently demonstrates deep understanding in their written work, aces assessments, and asks thoughtful questions one-on-one. But they’re quiet during full-class discussions. Because class participation counts for 15% of the grade, they end the quarter with a B+. The grade suggests they have partial mastery of the content—but in reality, their silence had nothing to do with their learning and everything to do with their personality or comfort level. That’s a false negative.


Here's another...A student grasps the math concepts completely and scores 90% or higher on quizzes and tests—but rarely completes homework. Maybe they have responsibilities at home, or maybe they find the repetitive practice unnecessary. The teacher deducts points for missing assignments, and the student ends up with a 75%. The grade implies they’ve only mastered three-quarters of the material. But it doesn’t reflect what they know—it reflects how much homework they did. Again, a false signal.


But—teachers will argue (and there is a method to the madness)—if we don’t grade behaviors like timeliness and participation, students won’t turn work in. Grades are a kind of currency. They motivate students who are otherwise disengaged. In some cases, that grade deduction is the only thing ensuring work is submitted at all.


And that leads us to the real dilemma: without grading behaviors, how do we foster engagement and responsibility?


The Engagement Matrix and the Motivation Gap

This brings us to a deeper issue—motivation and engagement. If we’re relying on grades to get students to turn in work, are they truly engaged in the learning? Or just compliant?

As someone who’s written three books on student engagement, I think about this all the time.


The Engagement Matrix helps differentiate between four types of engagement: non-compliant, compliant, interested, and absorbed.


While the holy grail is absorbed—when students are so into the learning that they lose track of time—that’s usually not realistic. Instead, we should aim for something more attainable: students who are interested in what they’re doing and have just enough extrinsic motivation to follow through.


Though extrinsic motivation has a bad rap, this is the most practical quadrant to target in schools—especially since school is compulsory and standards are non-negotiable. Even teachers don’t get to decide what students must learn.


Unfortunately, many students are stuck in the compliant zone: they do what’s expected, not because they’re curious, but because it’s required. If students do the work just to avoid a late penalty or a zero, besides the content, what else are they learning (like school is just about jumping through hoops).


Our goal should be to move students toward interested—to spark genuine investment in the task itself. But this takes time, intentional design, and trust. Even interested students are still extrinsically motivated—they do the work because it matters and because there’s a consequence. The difference is that the task itself holds value, not just the grade.


Why Grading Behavior Feels Necessary—But Isn’t Sustainable

Let’s acknowledge something: schools are complex places with high expectations and limited time. They have standards to teach. They need students to turn things in on time so they can move forward. When a student doesn’t meet a deadline, it causes disruption. And yes—timeliness, neatness, and communication are all important life skills.


But using the academic grade to punish or reward those behaviors confuses the message. A grade should say, “Here’s what you know.” Not “Here’s how fast you got it done.” Not “Here’s how you behaved while learning the content.” When we blur the lines between what students know and how they behave during learning, we risk sending the wrong message—not just to students, but to parents, colleges, and future employers.


I’m not saying behaviors don’t matter. I’m saying they shouldn’t be hidden inside the academic grade.


The challenge is that our traditional systems don’t leave much room for nuance. There’s pressure to cover standards. To report progress. To prepare students for what’s next. All of that is valid. But when we respond by folding behaviors like effort, attendance, and timeliness into the academic grade, we muddy the message. The grade no longer tells the truth.


Worse, we send the message that compliance is more important than learning. That it’s better to turn in mediocre work on time than great work a day late. That a student who quietly plays school gets higher marks than one who wrestles with ideas but misses a deadline.


So…What Do We Do Instead?

We still need structure. We still need accountability. But maybe we’ve been asking grades to do work they were never designed to do. What if we built different systems—systems that support responsibility without compromising the integrity of the grade?


If a student knows the content but struggles with responsibility, that’s a separate skill—and one that deserves targeted support, not hidden consequences. Just like we wouldn’t deduct points from an assignment because a student struggled to sit still, we shouldn’t deduct points because the assignment was late.


Schools that use standards- (or skill-) based report cards do this by reporting academic achievement and work habits separately. Others are implementing policies where students still experience accountability for behavior—but not through grade deductions. Conversations. Reflection. Detentions, maybe. Parent contact. Support plans. All of these can happen without distorting the grade.


Here’s the hard truth: there is no silver bullet. But there are better approaches. For example,

  • Separate academic achievement from work habits. Use report cards or progress reports to communicate both—clearly and separately.

  • Provide real accountability, not hidden penalties. Instead of docking points, follow up with reflection, conferencing, parent contact, or support plans. Treat behavioral gaps like skill gaps—opportunities for growth, not punishment.

  • Design learning that matters. The more engaging, relevant, and meaningful the task, the less you have to rely on grades to ensure participation.

  • Be transparent about expectations and feedback. Students are more likely to meet expectations when they know what those expectations are—and why they matter.


The Courage to Do Things Differently

We’re caught in a tension: grading behaviors feels necessary to keep students compliant. But doing so damages the integrity of the grade and undermines the measurement of a student’s knowledge of the standards.


There’s no quick fix. This isn’t just about policies—it’s about mindset. But if we want to promote authentic engagement, develop responsibility, and tell the truth about student learning, then we have to stop using grades as a catch-all tool.


Instead, let’s build systems that support both content mastery and the habits of learning—with clarity, honesty, and compassion. Because students don’t become more responsible when we hide accountability inside a grade. They become more responsible when we teach them what responsibility looks like—and why it matters.


We’ve gotten used to using grades for everything—for measurement, motivation, and management.  But when we try to make grades do everything, they stop doing anything well.


Penalizing grades for behaviors unrelated to learning may seem like the only way to hold students accountable, but it comes at the cost of clarity, honesty, and long-term engagement. And separating behavior from learning? That can feel risky in systems that equate compliance with success.


That’s the tension.


And it’s worth sitting with.


Because if we want grades to be valid, if we want learning to be meaningful, and if we want students to be motivated for the right reasons, then we can’t keep using the same tools in the same ways and expect different results.


~Heather


P.S. Ever find yourself driving and wishing you could capture a great idea before it slips away? Or sitting in a meeting, trying to remember every important detail someone just said?


My Catch of the Week is QuickTakes, a free app that does more than just record audio—it uses AI to turn those recordings into outlines, flashcards, and even study guides. You get up to six hours of recording time each month for free, making it a fantastic tool for students, professionals, or anyone who wants smarter, searchable notes from conversations, lectures, or brainstorming sessions.


P.P.S. Please remember to...


Like and share this post

Check out other posts 


Buy and rate your copy of Engagement is Not Unicorn (It's a Narwhal), 

From Amazon or Barnes & Noble


 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page