Hinsdale D-86 Officials Quarrel Over Grading Policy

DARIEN, IL — Hinsdale High School District 86 board members last week again disagreed over the district's new grading policy, with one accusing another of being "disingenuous."

The policy eliminates zeroes for missing assignments, giving students 50 percent instead. It also creates uniform grading policies for each course. Such policies establish what percentage of a grade is the result of tests, projects and labs and what percentage is from homework and quizzes.

At last week's meeting, members Jeff Waters, Debbie Levinthal and Peggy James expressed concern about the new system. They said some classes are 90 percent or 100 percent based on tests, projects and labs, which they said was too much. Those types of classes are mainly in the science department.

The three board members said students were given no notice about the new grading system.

But officials said the new system is an improvement over the historical practice. In the district's two schools, the administration counted nearly 40 different grading scales previously. In other words, officials said, students had no idea what the grading system for each class would be, given the wide variety of systems in the district.

Under the district's policies, the school board has no power over grading systems. That authority is left to the superintendent.

During the meeting, Waters noted that Chris Covino, the district's assistant superintendent, acknowledged there was an issue with communication previously.

Covino told the board he wished he would have sent one big public communication from his office over the summer explaining the rationale behind the new grading system.

"I believe we could have mitigated some of the consternation," he said.

Levinthal said communication was an issue.

"There is really no indication for a lot of parents that this was rolling out. Most people thought it would come to a board vote, that there would be a formal announcement," she said. "There wasn't a lot of buy-in cultivated on this amongst students and families."

Waters added, "Board member Levinthal, there was no buy-in at all."

Member Kathleen Hirsman objected.

"This is argumentative and counterproductive. This was brought up in good faith," she said. "We are not going to let this devolve into criticism regarding how it was rolled out. There is no action this board is going to take on this grading policy. I am tired of hearing a constant barrage of criticism of this administration."

She said the administration's two memos on the subject answered Waters' questions.

"What you are saying is disingenuous, and it is not consistent with the information that is being provided in these memos," Hirsman said.

Waters denied he was criticizing the administration. Rather, he said, he was looking out for students' interests and the "stress issues that are being generated."

"It is absolutely not an indictment against the administration. It is mere support for the kids," he said. "What you are telling me, board member Hirsman, is that it is impossible for us to encourage the administration to do anything about it."

Hirsman asked Waters not to put words in her mouth.

The board ended its discussion after about an hour. At that point, the board had been meeting for more than five hours. It was about 11 p.m.

The board also discussed the new grading system at its previous meeting, exposing tensions among members.