Are we getting grading right? That’s the question we (a university professor and district partnership team) sought to answer when we collaborated to examine grading practices and their impact on student learning. During one of our monthly professional learning sessions, as we pored over gradebooks and assessment data with middle and high school teachers, a veteran educator voiced what many in the profession have long struggled with: “We say grades should reflect what students know and can do, but we’re really grading everything from participation to compliance to attitude.”
While embedding behavioral assessments within academic grades may be administratively convenient, it perpetuates harmful inequities in our schools, particularly for students of color. The educator’s observation prompted us to more deeply examine how behavioral grading practices can perpetuate underlying biases in our assessment systems.
Studies reveal a troubling pattern: When teachers include behavioral factors in academic grades, they often unknowingly reinforce racial and gender inequities that can significantly impact students’ educational trajectories (Williams et al., 2020). These behavioral components—participation, effort, compliance with classroom rules, and what many educators call “citizenship”—form a hidden curriculum of cultural expectations that can account for as much as 50 percent of a student’s final grade (Link, 2018).
The Hidden Costs of Traditional Grading
Including behavioral factors in academic grades has become normalized, yet research shows this approach distorts true academic achievement (Link & Guskey, 2019). Traditional single-grade reporting systems often incorporate behavioral elements that reflect teachers’ implicit biases, leading to grades that reflect student’s conformity to cultural norms more than their mastery of content. Most concerning is how these practices can limit future opportunities. When students receive lower grades due to behavioral assessments, they’re less likely to be recommended for advanced courses and may face reduced college acceptance rates (Hengtgen & Biaggi, 2024). This creates a cycle of disadvantage that can impact students’ entire academic careers.
The ripple effect of these grading practices also extends beyond immediate academic consequences. When students internalize the message that their cultural ways of being are “inappropriate” for school success, it can lead to decreased engagement, lower self-efficacy, and a diminished sense of belonging. This psychological impact manifests in what researchers call academic identity threat, where students question their ability to succeed not because of their intellectual capabilities, but because of their perceived inability to conform to behavioral expectations that may be culturally misaligned with their home experiences (Wu et al., 2021).
Uncovering Patterns of Bias
The challenge with behavioral grading isn’t just its subjectivity—it’s also the way implicit and cultural biases shape how teachers perceive student behavior. Research reveals that teachers consistently interpret identical behaviors differently based on a student’s race, gender, or cultural background (Okonofua et al., 2016). For instance, Black male students often receive lower behavioral grades for actions that teachers view as “enthusiastic participation” when exhibited by white students (Warikoo et al., 2016). Similarly, students from cultures that value collaborative learning and active discussion may find themselves penalized in classrooms that prioritize individual, quiet work—a preference rooted more in cultural norms than learning effectiveness.
Gender bias also plays a significant role in behavioral grading. Studies show that girls typically receive higher grades for behaviors perceived as “compliant,” while boys are graded less favorably for behaviors seen as “disruptive,” even when those behaviors do not necessarily indicate lower engagement or learning (Di Liberto et al., 2022). This pattern underscores how behavioral grades often reflect teachers’ cultural expectations rather than students’ actual learning or engagement, highlighting the need for more equitable, research-based grading practices.
Many teachers were surprised to find that 40 percent or more of their grades reflected behavior, participation, and work habits rather than content mastery.
A Research-Based Solution: The Multiple Grades Report Card
To facilitate a more reliable understanding of student performance and enable more accurately informed decisions based on students’ grades, we conducted a study in the Bethlehem Area School District (BASD) in Pennsylvania. We implemented a multiple grades report card system that reports students’ noncognitive (behavioral) skills separately from achievement grades in 6th and 9th grade science and social studies classes.
The results were revealing. When comparing outcomes between traditional single-grade reporting and the multiple grades approach, we found that separating students’ behavioral assessments from academic grades did not significantly alter grade distributions in quarterly reports or final report cards. For instance, the number of students who earned an A in social studies class using the traditional report card system was equivalent to the number of students who earned the same academic grade in the same class using the multiple grades report card system—but the basis for those grades was clearer and more transparent. This suggests that separating these components doesn’t “lower standards” or place students at a competitive disadvantage, but rather provides more detailed diagnostic information by distinguishing between students’ academic mastery and their behavioral skills (Link et al., 2024).
More striking were the qualitative shifts we observed. Some teachers reported feeling more confident in their grading decisions when they didn’t have to wrestle with whether to deduct from academic grades for behavioral issues. Students, particularly those from historically marginalized groups, expressed relief at having their content knowledge evaluated separately from their classroom conduct. As one 9th grader told us, “Now I know my B+ in biology really means I understand the material—it’s not just because I’m quiet in class.”
The research findings are clear, but translating them into actionable change requires careful planning and sustained commitment. Moving from a traditional single-grade system to one that separates academic and behavioral assessments isn’t just a technical shift—it represents a fundamental reimagining of how we evaluate and support student growth.
BASD Assistant Superintendent Maureen Leeson visits a 3rd grade classroom and speaks with students about their work. Frequent classroom visits are one way district leadership supports learning and upholds high academic standards.
Making the Transition to a Multiple Grades Approach
Schools that have successfully made this transition share common implementation strategies that balance the need for clear communication, robust professional development, and systematic monitoring of outcomes. Bethlehem Area School District’s experience offers valuable insights into how other schools can navigate this complex but necessary transformation.
Start with Clear Communication
Effective implementation begins with transparent dialogue about why change is necessary. In BASD, we began with faculty professional learning that examined actual gradebooks and report cards, asking teachers to calculate what percentage of their grades came from behavioral factors versus academic achievement. Many were surprised to find that 40 percent or more of their grades reflected behavior, participation, and work habits rather than content mastery.
Share your own school’s grading data, disaggregated by demographic groups, to illustrate how current practices may be masking achievement. Include families in these discussions early on, helping them understand how separate reporting will provide clearer information about their children’s growth in both academic and behavioral domains.
Teachers reviewed their own grading patterns and participated in calibration exercises using student work samples to ensure consistent, objective evaluation.
Develop Distinct Reporting Categories
The success of separate skill reporting depends on clear, well-defined categories. In BASD’s multiple grades report card, we developed two distinct sections. The academic achievement section focused solely on content standards, using clear learning objectives and rubrics. For instance, in 9th grade biology, rather than a single grade that included points for lab behavior and homework completion, teachers reported separate grades for content understanding (based on tests, lab reports, and projects) and scientific practices (based on lab technique and analysis skills).
The behavioral skills section included specific, observable learning habits such as preparation for class, engagement in discussions, and collaboration skills. Each skill had clear descriptors and was rated on a three-point scale. This eliminated the practice of reducing academic grades for late work or classroom behavior, while still providing valuable feedback on these important skills.
Provide Professional Development
Teacher training must go beyond the mechanics of separate reporting to address the heart of grading bias. In BASD, we implemented a year-long professional development sequence that began with examining implicit bias in current grading practices. Teachers reviewed their own grading patterns and participated in calibration exercises using student work samples to ensure consistent, objective evaluation of both academic and behavioral skills.
Professional development also included practical workshops that focused on summative assessment criteria, distinguishing between formative and summative assessments, and report card entry procedures. Teachers received guidance on how to write authentic report card comments that include course information, academic feedback, and behavioral insights. Teachers also engaged in sessions that outlined procedures for student conferences, as well as student self-assessment practices. To ensure consistency across classrooms, teachers worked in content teams to plan backward by aligning summative unit assessments with their instructional priorities and formative practice opportunities for students. This collaborative approach helped build teacher confidence and competence in the new system.
Implement Systematic Monitoring
Regular monitoring ensures fidelity and provides evidence of impact. In BASD, we established quarterly data review protocols where teams examined both academic and behavioral skill distributions by student demographic groups. Teams looked for patterns and correlations between behavioral ratings and student characteristics. This ongoing analysis helped identify areas where implicit bias might still be influencing assessments and guided additional professional development needs.
We also surveyed students and families to gather feedback on the clarity and usefulness of the separate reporting system. This feedback loop helped us refine our communication and reporting formats to better serve all stakeholders.
The data from our monitoring efforts revealed another crucial insight: When behavioral assessments are separated from academic grades, teachers report having more productive conversations with students about both learning and behavior. Without the threat of grade penalties hanging over these discussions, students become more receptive to feedback about their behavioral choices and teachers are better able to address behavioral concerns without compromising their ability to accurately assess academic progress. This separation creates space for more authentic relationships and meaningful growth in both domains.
When behavioral assessments are separated from academic grades, teachers report having more productive conversations with students about both learning and behavior.
Dismantling Barriers
The persistence of grading bias in education isn’t just about assessment—it’s about equity and opportunity. Our traditional grading practices have long served as a hidden gateway, often barring students of color and other marginalized groups from advanced courses, special programs, and postsecondary opportunities. By continuing to embed behavioral assessments within academic grades, we perpetuate a system where implicit bias can covertly influence students’ educational trajectories.
The evidence from BASD and other studies shows that separate skill reporting isn’t just about changing report cards—it’s about dismantling systemic barriers that have disadvantaged certain students for generations. When we clearly separate academic achievement from behavioral skills, we make bias harder to hide and easier to address. We create a system where students’ futures are determined by their mastery of content and skills, not by how well they conform to cultural expectations of “good” student behavior (Zimmerman & Kao, 2019).
The journey toward more equitable grading practices requires sustained commitment and courage. It means examining our own biases, challenging long-held assumptions, and sometimes facing uncomfortable truths about our current practices. However, as we’ve seen in BASD, the potential impact—creating truly equitable educational opportunities while maintaining high academic standards—makes this work essential for all educators committed to student success.
