As semester grades roll out, the hallways are bustling with students frantically asking their peers what grade they received in certain classes, and they naturally begin to compare their personal performance to those of their classmates. “There is no doubt that grades do matter in the grand scheme of things,” sophomore Matthew Garchik said. “And as high schoolers, we naturally compare ourselves to others, and that can lead to even more stress around grading.” The fact that many students who put in different amounts of effort to receive the same grades demonstrates the subjective form of grading that some teachers at Parker take.  

Parker does not have a singular, robust grading model that spans across all departments and that is shared by all teachers. The freedom that Parker grants its teachers to compose their own curriculums and have their own approach to assessing student performance naturally leads to students being graded differently in each of their classes. When it comes to how teachers assess their students, there is a large spectrum that includes many different philosophies.

On one end of the spectrum, there are teachers who, like Upper School English teacher Bonnie Seebold, attempt to force students into thinking less about their grade, and more about their genuine passion for learning and developing their skills. “All I’m hearing in these past few years is grades, grades, grades,” Seebold said. “And that is understandable, I get it. But grades don’t have anything to do with becoming an educated person.” Seebold believes that at times, grades can do more harm than good. “Grades are a power trip to compare you to the next person,” Seebold said.

Representing someone on the other end of the spectrum there are teachers who, like Upper School English teacher Matt Laufer, believe that being more direct and open with their students is beneficial for them. “I guess I would describe my grading philosophy as a mix of being transparent and delivering grades as part of feedback so students can have a read on how they’re doing,” Laufer said. “On the other hand I do try to deliver the feedback sometimes without grades because sometimes transparency feels like a good thing, but I wonder if for some students it actually increases anxiety.” Each Upper School teacher’s personal philosophy on grading shines through because Parker gives them the freedom to do so.

The personal philosophy of a certain teacher can cause two students to have vastly different experiences is the same class but with two different teachers.  “My grading policy leaves things open to subjectiveness,” Seebold said. “I’m not about judging people, I’m about learning alongside people.” Seebold represents a unique end of the spectrum in terms of grading philosophy, where the essence of how she assesses students is by interpreting improvement in the skills of each student, and her judgment on their grasp on the skills of the class.

The idea of not always being able to check your grade and see a percentage that will correlate to a letter grade is daunting to some students. “While some teachers are trying to make grades less of a big thing, there are also the teachers that make me stressed about my grade in that class.” sophomore Ava Ori said. The ambiguity that students feel from some teachers frustrates them, especially because their experience between each teacher is so different.

The prospect of a universal system of grading and interpreting student performance is one that some students believe should be implemented in the school. “There needs to be a clear methodology for grading that is as objective as possible,” Garchik said. “One that is based on actual assignments rather than the teacher’s unwarranted opinion.”

Whether or not students will have the grading system that they prefer, the general consensus among the student body is that consistency amongst the upper school grading system takes precedence over what specific method the teachers use to assess performance.