Three posters hang in Principal Peyton Chapman’s office all pertaining to her proposal for a school wide grading scale. The first poster: “Pros and Cons.” The second poster: “Definition of Rigor.” The third reads: “The Disclaimer.”

Together, they reflect Chapman’s dilemma: Is a 91 percent on a test an A or a B? Parent questioning over a non-traditional grading scale led Chapman to propose a school-wide system for consistency among courses and to prevent confusion for students, parents, colleges and car insurance agencies that offer lower rates for good grades. “Given the subjectivity of grading, it just might be helpful to have consistency and common understanding that a common grading scale could provide,” Chapman said.

Chapman recognizes the disadvantages of a school-wide grading scale, such as the subjectivity of grades and denying freedom for teachers to have individual grading expectations. Chemistry teacher Larry Scheffler agrees with the disadvantages. “There is too much conformity,” he said. “One size does not fit all.”

The common grading scale proposed by Chapman is: 90-100 percent - A, 80-89 percent - B, 70-79 percent - C, 60-69 percent - D, and below 60 percent - F. “It is fair for students to have a scale consistent from class to class,” said Kathie Humes, International Baccalaureate coordinator. She adds that a school-wide grading scale could also prevent teacher shopping, where students choose teachers based on grading methods.

Currently teachers use a variety of scales. Robert Walker (Spanish), Lillian Faust (French), and Timm Goldhammer (health) set a percentage higher than 90 percent to receive an A. Other teachers such as David Bailey (Civics) have non-traditional grading scales for the lower percentages, with 50-69.9 percent - D. In some cases, teachers such as Scheffler use a curved scale to determine grades, with the highest grade setting the curve. “Teachers who set the expectations should also set the grading scales,” Scheffler said.

Students have mixed views. Senior Hannah Suher, who takes I.B. 9-10 French, agrees with Humes. “A 90 percent that equals a B is unfair and creates confusion for both parents and students.” Senior Zach Jones is not affected by the non-traditional grading scale in his I.B. 9-10 Spanish class. “I don’t think it [school-wide grading scale] makes a difference,” he said. However, senior Paul Kim, a student in I.B. 3-4 Chemistry, advocates for non-traditional grading scales. “When you have a set grading scale, you get a false sense that you know the material really well,” he said. “Scheffler does a good job of setting college-level grading standards (no set parameter for an A) that force students to push as hard as they can to become better students.”

The disclaimer for Chapman’s proposal says that a synchronized grading scale is not necessarily related to classroom rigor. Even though her proposal does not incorporate expectations for classroom rigor, she plans to promote equally challenging and rigorous classes throughout Lincoln. Chapman’s definition of rigor: Challenging students to use their minds well regularly through higher level questioning, critical thinking, analysis, and complex problem solving. “I am committed to having consistent expectations for rigor in all classes,” Chapman said.

At the next staff meeting on April 3, Chapman will propose the grading scale and lead discussions about rigor to improve overall quality of classroom instruction. According to Chapman, faculty must come to a consensus in order for the grading scale to come into effect.