ES's have no definition so just give up now. Keep the dialog open with your teacher and hope she doesn't fall down the Curriculum 2.0 rabbit hole too deeply that she offers no helpful feedback whatsoever. In addition to the non-informative Ps for Proficient.

My first grader reads at a M level and can do multi-digit multiplication and division in his head and I'll be shocked if he gets even one ES.

From what I can tell, the teachers assign grades based on a whim--every math paper comes home with all answers correct, some are graded as a P, some are graded as an ES.

I think you're doing your kid a great disservice if you press her to get ESs, considering that the standard for getting one seems to vary depending on the school, teacher, day of the week, phase of the moon, and whether blueberries are in season.

OP, I read through all the replies just to make sure I'm not repeating what someone else had said. I felt sure someone would have made this point.

The grades your child is getting in class are the grade they get for the work they've done in that class. It's not a test grade like you get for the MAP R, or on an SAT or a score on an IQ test.

The "Reading" grade is not necessarily about your child's reading ability level.


It is your child's grade for the class. Maybe your child didn't show the teacher that she understood the material. Maybe your child didn't read the work assigned. Maybe she was chatting with her friends half the time the teacher was trying to discuss the book. She might be the greatest reader in the world, but not a good student in the reading class at school. Actually, the P says that she IS a good student in Reading. She's just not an above-and-beyond student in that class.

It seems not very respectful of the teaching process if the teacher gives grades based purely on an ability ranking if the student is not performing well in class. They might as well use the MAP-R to determine the grades, and then what's the point of having the kids in class at all?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to drop the idea that ES is a goal. P is the goal.

P means the student is meeting basic grade level expectations, but ES seems to mean they're going above and beyond, doing more than just the minimum. To me I would think that is the goal, as doing just the bare minimum of what is needed is rarely encouraged in our family.

The way I'm understanding what you and some other posters have written would mean that P is both the minimum acceptable grade to be on grade level and the best possible grade a student can get if ES is not given out very much if at all. That doesn't seem to make sense, as to me there should be a difference between a student who has struggled but put in a great effort and just met the grade's expectations versus a student who shows pretty consistent mastery of all the skills for their particular grade. Both may be proficient at the required skills, but it seems strange to me that the level of understanding and achievement of both students is represented in exactly the same way. P seems to be a pretty wide range of mastery then, and I'm not sure that provides the most helpful sort of information to parents and teachers.

The grading system is designed so that P is the goal. ES is not something the kids should be striving for. Its not an A. Its like an A+, but even more random.

Interesting. I'm not quite sure I like it, but that's good to know. I think "Proficient" just has a bad connotation for me, so that's an issue of needing to change my understanding and expectations. Thanks! I'm glad to learn that my kids really are mostly on track then.

Anonymous wrote: The goal is to understand what the teacher has taught, so the goal is a P. Again, you really shouldn't try to compare it to an A grade. It's not comparable.

This is correct. If your student gets a P, that's like an A. If you student gets an ES that's like the teacher recommends your student for AP classes. Every kid in high school can get an A... only a few get selected for AP classes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to drop the idea that ES is a goal. P is the goal.

P means the student is meeting basic grade level expectations, but ES seems to mean they're going above and beyond, doing more than just the minimum. To me I would think that is the goal, as doing just the bare minimum of what is needed is rarely encouraged in our family.

The way I'm understanding what you and some other posters have written would mean that P is both the minimum acceptable grade to be on grade level and the best possible grade a student can get if ES is not given out very much if at all. That doesn't seem to make sense, as to me there should be a difference between a student who has struggled but put in a great effort and just met the grade's expectations versus a student who shows pretty consistent mastery of all the skills for their particular grade. Both may be proficient at the required skills, but it seems strange to me that the level of understanding and achievement of both students is represented in exactly the same way. P seems to be a pretty wide range of mastery then, and I'm not sure that provides the most helpful sort of information to parents and teachers.

The grading system is designed so that P is the goal. ES is not something the kids should be striving for. Its not an A. Its like an A+, but even more random.

Anonymous wrote:You have to drop the idea that ES is a goal. P is the goal.

P means the student is meeting basic grade level expectations, but ES seems to mean they're going above and beyond, doing more than just the minimum. To me I would think that is the goal, as doing just the bare minimum of what is needed is rarely encouraged in our family.

The way I'm understanding what you and some other posters have written would mean that P is both the minimum acceptable grade to be on grade level and the best possible grade a student can get if ES is not given out very much if at all. That doesn't seem to make sense, as to me there should be a difference between a student who has struggled but put in a great effort and just met the grade's expectations versus a student who shows pretty consistent mastery of all the skills for their particular grade. Both may be proficient at the required skills, but it seems strange to me that the level of understanding and achievement of both students is represented in exactly the same way. P seems to be a pretty wide range of mastery then, and I'm not sure that provides the most helpful sort of information to parents and teachers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Are you saying it isn't possible to do that in MCPS? Even if my kids are getting all of the problems correct and mastering all the skills with few mistakes they will still get P and not ES? Why would they have a grade that is unattainable when usually the presence of a grade higher on the scale means that there is a better level the student could be performing at? I don't want my kid to "only" be doing P level work if they "could" be doing ES level work, but if ES isn't really something that is given out even for the highest quality of work and a complete understanding of the material, then that changes how I will look at their grades.

Yes, they will still get a P. If they are getting all of the problems correct and mastering all of the skills with few mistakes, that means that they are learning what they are supposed to learn. Which is good! And learning what you are supposed to learn is a P.

Thank you very much for your response. I'm glad that P is good, but it seems like that means it is the baseline level for where they should be. ES seems to mean that they are going above and beyond the minimum, and while I know my kids are young and definitely not geniuses I would like to think that I could help them work beyond the basics in at least a few subjects to earn an ES. Maybe my understanding is wrong and a P is not just basic barely meeting the grade level standard. At the kids' old school that would have been a 2 or 3 and they could pass to the next grade with it, but many kids were able to extend further beyond that and they would get a 4 for mastery beyond just the expected level. It seems like I need to take some time to reframe my goals and expectations for the kids in terms of what is expected in this school system. I'm going to take a look at the school website and see if I can learn more about how each of the standards based levels of grade are earned. Thanks for the reality check.

Anonymous wrote:

It's elementary school. There are so many concepts being taught. I think the grading scale is sufficient for such a fluid curriculum.

N- Not grasping it yet - need work
I - In progress.. kid is putting the pieces together
P - Proficient... kid gets it.
ES - Kid is working beyond the subject matter - lets do something to keep the kid engaged.

I don't think we really need A's to F's to grade 6-10 year olds. I think the current scale ensures that areas that need attention, get attention.

I agree. This is all I need to know for my first grader; is she learning what she is supposed to? Is she struggling with any areas? Is she showing extra talent/ability in any areas? My daughter's teacher has been teaching first grade for over 30 years and said at back-to-school night that she doesn't think first grade should be graded at all. Save that for later years.

Anonymous wrote:
The reason I like letter grades, even in elementary school, is that to me they provide the clearest possible picture of exactly how much the kid has learned and grasped sufficiently to actually show in various ways that can be assessed. Typically, the letter grades correspond to specific percentages. In this way, I can see that my child who has earned a "C" grade knows between 70% and 79% of the material. To me that is not very good, because it means 20-30% of the material they do not understand. So I could ask the teacher how to help them understand more of the material, until they're closer to 85 or 90% which seems like a much more solid basis to move on to additional material.

It doesn't mean this, though. All it means is that they got 70-79% of the possible points. The points might have been for what they knew (for example, on a test), or the points might have been for what they did related to the subject (for example, on a project), or the points might even have been for something they did unrelated to the subject (for example, they participated in class, or they turned a project in on time).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is why I dislike the standards based grading used in elementary. With the letter grades, there is a clearcut objective standard, and it is obvious how grades are obtained -- by mastering X% of the material, the student earns Y grade. I think that makes it easier to see how to help a student improve their learning and work up to the next highest grade. With the new elementary grading style, it seems very ambiguous. Nobody is quite sure what specifically is required to earn each level of "grade", so it is more difficult to come up with a plan to help a student improve.

OP here.

I think this is what my issue is with the ES. It's hard to achieve a goal if that goal is not well-defined.

That's the point that the other PP was making - the goal is not an ES. It is a P.

An ES is given to those kids that have not just completely understood the material, but can demonstrate a higher/deeper understanding that the teacher hasn't even taught. The goal is to understand what the teacher has taught, so the goal is a P. Again, you really shouldn't try to compare it to an A grade. It's not comparable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone like standards based grading? How long before a new system is adopted?

I like standards-based grading. It's at least as clear and useful as O/S/I or A/B/C/D/E for classes, in elementary school, and I don't think that letter grades for classes belong in elementary school. The goal for elementary school students should be learning, not striving for grades.

The reason I like letter grades, even in elementary school, is that to me they provide the clearest possible picture of exactly how much the kid has learned and grasped sufficiently to actually show in various ways that can be assessed. Typically, the letter grades correspond to specific percentages. In this way, I can see that my child who has earned a "C" grade knows between 70% and 79% of the material. To me that is not very good, because it means 20-30% of the material they do not understand. So I could ask the teacher how to help them understand more of the material, until they're closer to 85 or 90% which seems like a much more solid basis to move on to additional material.

I don't care so much that they earn "the highest grade" as I care that they "understand most if not all of the concepts/skills". It's just easier for me to tell under letter grades. In theory, standards based grading SHOULD be the best for this because it seems like it would be designed to tell me exactly what I want to know. However, maybe I just don't know enough about the grading system, because I have never understood HOW teachers determine whether a student is at the "I", "P" or "ES" level and what specifically is assessed to make that determination. I don't know that they need to get X% more points on specific kinds of problems in math, or improve their reading skills by a certain number of levels, and that will constitute having demonstrated sufficient mastery to move up a level on the grades. I think I would be satisfied with standards based grading if the standards and how they were assessed were more clear to me, however as it stands now it seems quite ambiguous and that makes it difficult for me to feel that I am being as effective as possible at helping my kids learn what they need to know.

Anonymous wrote:

Are you saying it isn't possible to do that in MCPS? Even if my kids are getting all of the problems correct and mastering all the skills with few mistakes they will still get P and not ES? Why would they have a grade that is unattainable when usually the presence of a grade higher on the scale means that there is a better level the student could be performing at? I don't want my kid to "only" be doing P level work if they "could" be doing ES level work, but if ES isn't really something that is given out even for the highest quality of work and a complete understanding of the material, then that changes how I will look at their grades.

Yes, they will still get a P. If they are getting all of the problems correct and mastering all of the skills with few mistakes, that means that they are learning what they are supposed to learn. Which is good! And learning what you are supposed to learn is a P.

Anonymous wrote:
As to the PP who says it's just raw intelligence, I find that crazy. Do you really believe that some kids are just simply smarter than other kids? Is that what you teach your own kids?

Some kids simply are smarter than other kids. And by quite a large margin at times. That's why there are percentiles.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone like standards based grading? How long before a new system is adopted?

I like standards-based grading. It's at least as clear and useful as O/S/I or A/B/C/D/E for classes, in elementary school, and I don't think that letter grades for classes belong in elementary school. The goal for elementary school students should be learning, not striving for grades.