In the classrooms of Berkeley High School, actively participating in the classroom is thoroughly encouraged and often graded. Although this way of grading is currently imperfect and has many problems, participation grades shouldn’t be completely removed but instead, changed. Teachers should first make a clear rubric as to how participation is graded to remove subjectivity. Next, in order to remove tough barriers for quieter students, they should also add multiple ways to participate, such as written reflections, small group conversations, exit tickets, etc.
The general purpose of participation grades is clear: teachers want an engaged and active classroom in which students are focused and utilize class time effectively. “If students know that tests are the only thing that’s graded, it’s not enough motivation for every student to do all the assignments,” Adrian Altawil, a BHS freshman physics teacher, said, “So I need some other tools (participation grades), in order to get them to be participating in all the labs, all the notes and everything.”
A lively classroom is often attributed to deeper learning as students will pay more attention and critically think. A major study by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) found that students in active learning classes are 50 percent less likely to fail. Participation grades can also increase respectful behavior, leading to a decrease in side conversations and distractions. In theory, they should reward students for engagement, effort, and the classroom environment they contribute to creating.
The reality is usually much more complicated. The first immediate issue is that participation grades are subjective. Unlike a math test where there are clear right or wrong answers, participation is measured by a teacher’s perception. Students can be left wondering what counts as meaningful participation, whether it be the number of times a student raises their hand or how focused and studious they look. “Sometimes you don’t know what’s considered participation. You forget to participate because you don’t know what that even is,” BHS sophomore Oak Griffin said.
Participation grades can also unintentionally disadvantage quieter or more introverted students. “I think participation grades are made for louder students more than the quiet ones. If you have a hard time being social, that shouldn’t affect your grade,” Griffin said. Some students think for a while before speaking or don’t feel comfortable contributing unless they are fully confident. A student might know the answer to a question but won’t raise their hand.
In the classroom, participation grades might track personality more than mastery of the subject. In an ideal scenario, grades are supposed to measure a student’s understanding of the material that is being taught. This can be done through essays, tests and projects which all effectively measure how well a student is doing. The same cannot be said for participation grades that often measure behavior and confidence. Although these are important traits, they should not be what is considered understanding.
Participation grades can make the normally calm atmosphere have unnecessary pressure. “If I don’t know an answer, ... I will still have to say something so I have to get a better grade. So I think it does add a level of stress to it,” Griffin said. This pressure can be increased if the participation grade is a significant amount of the student’s grade.
This does not mean that getting rid of participation grades is the right answer. If there is no incentive to participate, conversations will only have a few voices, and other students will not partake. Participation grades can push students out of their comfort zone and grow skills such as collaboration and critical thinking — both of which are important in and out of school.
Ultimately, participation grades are important to foster critical skills and diverse classroom engagement. However, teacher grading rubrics must be explicit and clear for all students. Additionally, such rubrics should be made to reflect learning and content understanding while incentivizing involvement, not put students who show their learning in other ways at a disadvantage.