1

July 31, 2015

Review of Grade Change Data, Causes, and Related Policy and Procedures

Executive Summary

Over the past year, APS has completed eight investigations involving inappropriate grade changes (four from the 2013-2014 school year and four from the 2014-2015 school year). As a result, the Chief Accountability and Information Officer and his team have conducted a review of practices related to the use of the automated teacher gradebook, data from the Infinite Campus Transcript Audit Reports (that show the differences between the teachers gradebooks and the official transcript data that are sent to the state), and the reasons for discrepancies between the gradebooks and transcripts. High school data for the past three years have been reviewed. However, to understand and document current practices, procedures, and reasons for grade changes, a detailed review of the 2014-2015 data was conducted. In general, except for one school, the Transcript Audit Report data for 2012-2013, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015 are similar (see table below).

Number of Grade Changes (by year)

2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

District Total 2332 3471 2134

The one significant outlier, in terms of the number of changes, was in 2013-2014 at South Atlanta School of Law and Social Justice where there were 793 grade changes. (Because of complaints from school staff about practices at the school, an investigation of the schools practices was begun last fall and completed in May 2015. This is one of the eight investigations that were completed earlier this year and noted above.) It should also be noted that the number of grade changes varies somewhat by school across years. To better understand these variations, as part of this review, particular attention was given to schools with larger number of grade changes in 2014-2015, and the findings are discussed below. This examination included not only a review of the data, but also interviews with appropriate central office staff, teachers, registrars, and principals. It is important to note that in 2014-2015 there were 11,556 high school students and each student received about 16 grades. In other words, the 2,134 changes were in relation to about 185,000 total grades for these students. This is a rate of approximately 1 change out of every 100 grades. It might be assumed that all grade changes result in students receiving higher grades, or a change from a failing to a passing grade. However, the data show a more complex set of circumstances and outcomes. For example, of the 2,134 changes, in only 50% of the cases was a numeric grade changed to a higher grade; in 24.9% of the cases the grade was changed from a letter grade (e.g., incomplete) to a numeric grade; and in 25% of the cases the students actually received lower grades. Similarly, less than half (741) of these changes were either from failing to passing grades or from letter grades (such as incompletes) to passing grades. In many cases (889), while there was a grade change, it was correcting or changing a passing grade to another higher or lower passing grade. The third big category of changes was grade

Office of Accountability and Testing 130 Trinity Ave, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3624

2

changes that resulted in failing final grades (481). The last small group (23) were grade changes that resulted in letter grades such as incompletes.

In regard to the reasons for grade changes, again the circumstances and reasons vary among schools. As already noted, over the past year, APS has completed eight investigations involving inappropriate grade changes (four from the 2013-2014 school year and four from the 2014-2015 school year). This review did not identify additional cases of serious inappropriate actions, although we did find inconsistencies in practice, lack of clarity in process, and a lack of the necessary safeguards to effectively prevent inappropriate activity.

It is important to note that this review was largely a data review. It focused specifically on data changes in the Infinite Campus Transcript Audit Reports. Staff also reviewed and compared the data from the audit reports with the data on the paper change forms used by schools. Additionally, interviews were conducted with central office staff, teachers, registrars, and nine high school principals to review and analyze school and district practices, district procedures and policies, and specific cases where large numbers of changes were made in 2014-2015. Moving forward, the district will implement new workflow requirements and closely monitor grade changes, and will continue to thoroughly investigate any additional accusations of wrong doing and/or inappropriate or questionable practices. The district maintains a hot line for anyone to anonymously call to reports misconduct, and employees, stakeholders, parents, and students are strongly encouraged to either use the hot line or to directly contact either the APS Employee Relations office or the Superintendents office if they are concerned about any conduct, practice, or policy that seems questionable or inappropriate.

Among the recommendations presented in the report are a number related to processes, policies, training, and monitoring. It is clear from the review that the schools and district must improve in these areas to ensure the integrity of the students grades.

The attached report provides detailed data, analysis, findings and recommendations. Over the new few weeks, as teachers and staff return to school, the district will continue to examine related policies and practices. In some cases, it seems clear that additional guidance and training for administrators, registrars, and teachers are needed. While this report is an important step, it will be critical to involve all stakeholders as we continue to improve our standard operating procedures, policies, communication, and training.

3

Historical Data by School

The number of grade changes1 for the past three years are summarized in the table and graph below. The table provides the counts of the number of changes to final student grades. These data are based on an Infinite Campus report that compares the grade book grade with the transcript grade.2 According to Administrative Regulation, all challenges to grades must be made within 15 days. However, errors (based on evidence) can be corrected at any time.

It should be noted that the data in the table do not take into consideration the size of the school. For example, in 2014-2015 Mays HS had a larger number of changes than South Atlanta Law; however, Mays HS has a much larger student enrollment. To provide a more useful and appropriate comparison, the graph (page 4) below takes enrollment into account and show a (per student) ratio relative to enrollment. Number of Grade Changes by School

School 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

BEST High 8 25 12

Carver Arts 55 238 31

Carver Early College 77 91 13

Carver Health 58 19 18

Carver Technology 56 219 18

Alonzo Crim Open Campus 77 87 111

Coretta Scott King HS 8 35 241

Frederick Douglass HS 129 286 243

Charles R. Drew Academy 0 41 14

Forrest Hills 3 86 93

Henry W. Grady HS 348 244 269

Hillside 0 4 0

Maynard Jackson High 149 181 86

KIPP Collegiate 122 58 181

Benjamin E. Mays 282 277 292

North Atlanta 160 331 64

South Atlanta CAD 93 50 32

South Atlanta Health 172 39 51

South Atlanta Law 197 793 258

Therrell Health 21 64 25

Therrell Law 37 90 25

Therrell S.T.E.M.S 121 37 29

BT Washington HS 128 143 0

West End 31 33 28

Grand Total 2332 3471 2134

As can be seen below, when we divide the number of changes by the enrollment the ratio provides a better understanding of the data. Using the example above, while Mays HS had a larger number of grade changes than South Atlanta Law, the number of changes per student for Mays HS is much smaller. The color of each bar indicate the types of change: Blue indicates changes where the grade did not change from a failing grade to a passing one; gray indicates a change from a letter code (such as I = incomplete or NG = no grade) to a number grade; and orange indicates that a number grade was changed from failing to passing.

1 Grade changes are defined as cases where the grades in the teachers Infinite Campus gradebook do not match the grade in the official transcript file that is sent to the state.

2 After teachers complete their final grades, they post the grades to a transcript. Once the grades are posted, teachers can correct or change grades in their grade book, BUT they cannot re-post the grades to the transcript or official grade file. To change a grade in transcript, a teacher must complete a grade change form and submit it to the school registrar who then will manually change the grade in the transcript.

4

Three Categories of Grade Changes

The data in the table below summarize the types of grade changes found for each high school. There are three broad categories of grade changes:

Changes to failing grades these include failing grades that were changed to either higher or lower failing grades; letter grades (such as incompletes) that were changed to failing grades; and (in a small number of cases) passing grades that were changed to failing grades.

Changes to letter grades this is, by far, the smallest category (total of 23) and include changes from passing grades to letter grades; changes from letter grades to a different letter grade; and changes from failing grades to letter grades.

Changes to passing grades these include passing grades that were changed to either higher or lower passing grades; letter grades (such as incompletes) that were changed to passing grades; and failing grades that were changed to passing grades.

As can be seen in the table below, in 2014-2015 there were a total of 2,134 grade changes where the teachers grade book and the official transcript grades did not match. Since there were 11,556 high school students enrolled, there were .18 grade changes per student. However, it is important to note that typically each student has 16 posted grades per year.3 As a result, the more meaningful comparison is to compare the 2,134 changes in relation to about 185,000 grades posted to transcript each year for high school students (or about one grade change for every 100 posted grades). It should also be noted that in more than half the cases, the grade changes do not impact whether the student passed or failed the course. Specifically, for example, in 204 cases the change was from a failing grade to another failing grade. The grade may have been raised or lowered, but the final grade was still a failing grade; in an additional 252 cases, letter grades (e.g., I = Incomplete) were changed to failing grades; and in 889 cases, the grade was changed from a passing grade to a higher or lower passing grade. In other words, of the 2,134 changes at least 1,345 of the changes did not result in a failing grade being changed to a passing grade. In fact, in only 482 cases were failing grades posted in teachers grade books changed to passing grades in the official transcript file. The most common reasons for grade changes are described below.

3 Most high school students will have 16 grades per year regardless if they are in a 4 X 4 or 4 X 8 schedule. For students with 4 X 4 schedules, they take four courses each semester; at the end of each quarter, they receive a grade (e.g., for 9th grade literature, a student in a 4 X 4 would receive .5 credits each quarter is they pass); at the end of the first semester, the four courses are completed and the student has received 8 grades four in each quarter. For a student in a 4 X 8 schedule, the student is taking 8 courses, and receiving 8 grades each semester (e.g., for a student taking 9th grade literature, the student would earn .5 credits each semester).

5

To explain the data in the table below, for example, the school with the largest number of changes in relation to the school enrollment was Coretta Scott King HS (CSK). Specifically, the school enrollment was 244 and there were 241 grade changes at CSK in 2014-2015. As a result, in 2014-2015 there was about one grade change (.99) per student enrolled at CSK. (Again however, it should be noted that students typically take either four courses per quarter or eight courses per semester (see footnote 3). so the rate of changes for CSK is about one in every 16 grades.) As can also be seen, CSK is somewhat unique in that more than half of the changes (124 or 51.5%) in 2014-2015 were to failing final grades. Again, this example is only to help explain the data in the table. The next two columns of data show the numbers and percentages of grade changes to letter grades. As can be seen, there were a total of 23 changes in this category (see last row of the table below). The last two columns, show the numbers and percentages of grades that were changed to passing grades. Changes to passing grades are the most common type of grade change. As can be seen, districtwide there were 1630 grade changes to passing grades or 76.4% of all changes were to passing grades. These data include three subcategories: grades changed from passing grades to passing grades; grades changed from letter grades to passing numerical grades; and grade changes from failing to passing grades. Again, to put this number in perspective it should be noted that total enrollment in 2014-2015 for grades 9-12 was 11,556 students and, typically, each student received eight grades per semester (in either a 4 X 4 or 4 X 8 schedule) or 16 grades per year (see footnote 3). Therefore, in 2014-2015 the total number of grades for all students enrolled in grades 9-12 was about 185,000. The reasons for these changes vary across schools and are detailed below. 2014-2015 Grade Changes

School Enroll- ment

# of Changes

Changes per Enrolled Student

All Changes to Failing Grades

% of Changes that are to Failing Grades

All Changes to Letter Grades

% Changes that are to Letter Grades

All Changes to Passing Grades

% of Changes that are to Passing Grades

Coretta Scott King Academy HS 244 241 0.99 124 51.5% 0 0.0% 117 48.5%

South Atlanta Law and Social Justice 266 258 0.97 74 28.7% 0 0.0% 184 71.3%

Forrest Hill Academy 143 93 0.65 52 55.9% 0 0.0% 41 44.1%

KIPP Atlanta Collegiate 499 181 0.36 33 18.2% 0 0.0% 148 81.8%

Alonzo Crim Open Campus 322 111 0.34 30 27.0% 8 7.2% 73 65.8%

Frederick Douglass High School 776 243 0.31 65 26.7% 8 3.3% 170 70.0%

Henry W. Grady High School 1286 269 0.21 23 8.6% 2 0.7% 244 90.7%

South Atlanta Health & Medical Sciences 278 51 0.18 7 13.7% 0 0.0% 44 86.3%

Benjamin E. Mays High School 1614 292 0.18 28 9.6% 0 0.0% 264 90.4%

West End Academy PLC 171 28 0.16 9 32.1% 3 10.7% 16 57.1%

South Atlanta Computer Design 267 32 0.12 4 12.5% 0 0.0% 28 87.5%

Therrell S.T.E.M.S 259 29 0.11 2 6.9% 0 0.0% 27 93.1%

Therrell Health Science & Research 240 25 0.10 4 16.0% 0 0.0% 21 84.0%

Therrell Law Govn & Public Policy 243 25 0.10 2 8.0% 0 0.0% 23 92.0%

Carver School of the Arts 343 31 0.09 5 16.1% 0 0.0% 26 83.9%

Maynard Jackson High School 954 86 0.09 6 7.0% 0 0.0% 80 93.0%

Charles R. Drew Charter Academy 196 14 0.07 4 28.6% 0 0.0% 10 71.4%

Carver School of Technology 285 18 0.06 2 11.1% 0 0.0% 16 88.9%

Carver School of Health Sciences 304 18 0.06 4 22.2% 0 0.0% 14 77.8%

BEST Academy High School 212 12 0.06 0 0.0% 2 16.7% 10 83.3%

Carver Early College 316 13 0.04 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 13 100.0%

North Atlanta High School 1574 64 0.04 3 4.7% 0 0.0% 61 95.3%

BT Washington HS 764

Total 11556 2134 0.18 481 22.5% 23 1.1% 1630 76.4%

6

Grade Changes: Timing, Size, and Patterns (e.g., to 70)

As is shown above, of the 2,134 grade changes 1630 (76.4%) resulted in a passing grade. However, as is shown in detail below, only 482 (22.6%) of the changes were from failing grades to a passing grades, while an additional 259 (12.1%) were from letter grades (e.g., incompletes) to passing (numeric) grades. Conversely, 889 (41.7%) of the changes were from passing grades to a higher or lower passing grades. The remaining grade changes were to either failing grades (481 or 22.5%) or to letter grades (23 or 1.1%). In the majority of cases where numeric grades were changed to other numeric grades, the grade increased. As shown in the table below, in 533 cases the grade changes were from numeric grades to lower grades. However, some of the grade changes resulted in significantly higher grades. For example, in 190 (9.3%) cases the grade increases were 21 points or higher. Based on principal interviews, typically changes of this size were the result of students handing in missing assignments or making up one or more very low grades.

Magnitude of Grade Changes Number Percentage

Transcript grade was letter 23 1.1

Letter to Numeric Transcript Grade 511 23.9

Transcript grade was lower 533 25.0

Increases:

0-5 points 448 21.0

6-10 points 239 11.2

11-15 110 5.2

16-20 80 3.7

21-25 41 1.9

26-30 38 1.8

>30 111 5.2

Total 2,134 100%

For all grade changes (letter or numeric), the distribution of final transcript grades is shown below. Again, many (481) of the grade changes were to failing grades (i.e., less than 70), while many (663) of the changes were to grades between 70 and 75 (i.e., low passing grades). Few (289) of the changes resulted in grades higher than 90 and many of these changes were to apply the 10 points earned for AP courses. Based on interviews with principals, the students with higher grades include students who monitor their grades closely and are, perhaps, more likely than other students to challenge grades that they believe are incorrect even if the errors or changes are very small.

Final Transcript Grade Number Percentage

Letter grade 23 1.1

100 (AP and IB courses) 27 1.3

Total 2,134 100%

In 2013-2014, a number of changes at South Atlanta School of Law and Social Justice were made long after the close of the 2013-2014 school year (e.g., in fall of 2014). As a result, for the most recent (2014-2015) data, the timeline of the changes was examined. As can be seen, the large majority of the grade changes took place during the months when grading period end or the month immediately after a grading period ended. In the case of a couple of high schools, principals indicated that students return after the winter breaks and challenge the accuracy of their grades. Although this may occur after the 15 day appeal window, if schools believe the student is correct in their challenge the school is likely to make the correction even after the window is supposed to have closed.

7

Month Number Percentage

August September ---- ----

October (1st Quarter) 32 1.5

November 57 2.7

December ( 1st Semester) 19 0.9

January 191 9.0

February 155 7.3

March (3rd Quarter) 311 14.6

April 47 2.2

May (2nd Semester 1,039 48.7

June (Summer School) 282 13.2

July 1 0.0

Total 2,134 100%

Three Categories of Grade Changes: to Failing Grades

As was shown in the table above, 22.5% of the grade changes were to final grades that were failing grades. As was noted in the example above, Coretta Scott King HS (CSK) had the largest number and percentage (124 and 51.5%, respectively) of grade changes resulting in failing grades. As is shown in the table, in 123 of the 124 cases, the grade changes were from a letter grade (i.e., Incomplete was coded with the letter I) to a failing grade. This was also a common practice at the South Atlanta HS for Law and Social Justice. The detailed data and information for these schools are summarized below.

The second most common subcategory from changes to failing grade is changes from a failing grade to a different, but also, failing grade. For examples, at both Forrest Hill Academy and Douglas HS there were 51 cases where the grade book and transcript grades differed but both grades were failing grades (i.e., a numerical grade below 70). Grade Changes to Failing Grades

School Enroll- ment

# of Changes

Changes per Enrolled Student

Failing to Failing (Numeric)

Letter to Failing

Passing to Failing (Numeric)

All Changes to Failing Grades

% of Changes that are to Failing Grades

Coretta Scott King Academy HS 244 241 0.99 1 123 124 51.5%

South Atlanta Law and Social Justice 266 258 0.97 74 74 28.7%

Forrest Hill Academy 143 93 0.65 51 1 52 55.9%

KIPP Atlanta Collegiate 499 181 0.36 6 26 1 33 18.2%

Alonzo Crim Open Campus 322 111 0.34 14 6 10 30 27.0%

Frederick Douglass High School 776 243 0.31 51 14 65 26.7%

Henry W. Grady High School 1286 269 0.21 18 2 3 23 8.6%

South Atlanta Health & Medical Sciences 278 51 0.18 5 2 7 13.7%

Benjamin E. Mays High School 1614 292 0.18 23 2 3 28 9.6%

West End Academy PLC 171 28 0.16 6 1 2 9 32.1%

South Atlanta Computer Design 267 32 0.12 2 2 4 12.5%

Therrell S.T.E.M.S 259 29 0.11 2 2 6.9%

Therrell Health Science & Research 240 25 0.10 4 4 16.0%

Therrell Law Government & Public Policy 243 25 0.10 2 2 8.0%

Carver School of the Arts 343 31 0.09 3 0 2 5 16.1%

Maynard Jackson High School 954 86 0.09 6 6 7.0%

Charles R. Drew Charter Academy 196 14 0.07 2 2 4 28.6%

Carver School of Technology 285 18 0.06 2 0 0 2 11.1%

Carver School of Health Sciences 304 18 0.06 3 0 1 4 22.2%

BEST Academy High School 212 12 0.06 0 0.0%

Carver Early College 316 13 0.04 0 0 0 0 0.0%

North Atlanta High School 1574 64 0.04 3 3 4.7%

Total 11556 2134 0.18 204 252 25 481 22.5%

8

Three Categories of Grade Changes: to Passing Grades As was noted above, in 2014-2015, 1630 of the 2134 total grade changes (76.4%) were to final grades that were passing grades. What was not shown is that the large majority (889) of these changes were from grades that were already passing to different grades that were also passing. Of the 1630 changes, 259 were from letter grades to passing numerical grades, and 482 of the changes were from failing grades to passing grades. Again, a detailed summary of reasons for these changes is provided below. Grade Changes to Passing Grades

School Enroll- ment

# of Changes

Changes per Enrolled Student

Failing to Passing (Numeric)

Letter to Passing

Passing to Passing (Numeric)

All Changes to Passing Grades

% of Changes that are to Passing Grades

Coretta Scott King Academy HS 244 241 0.99 8 63 46 117 48.5%

South Atlanta Law and Social Justice 266 258 0.97 105 57 22 184 71.3%

Forrest Hill Academy 143 93 0.65 18 23 41 44.1%

KIPP Atlanta Collegiate 499 181 0.36 79 51 18 148 81.8%

Alonzo Crim Open Campus 322 111 0.34 27 6 40 73 65.8%

Frederick Douglass High School 776 243 0.31 71 46 53 170 70.0%

Henry W. Grady High School 1286 269 0.21 21 9 214 244 90.7%

South Atlanta Health & Medical Sciences 278 51 0.18 34 10 44 86.3%

Benjamin E. Mays High School 1614 292 0.18 29 9 226 264 90.4%

West End Academy PLC 171 28 0.16 2 6 8 16 57.1%

South Atlanta Computer Design 267 32 0.12 17 3 8 28 87.5%

Therrell S.T.E.M.S 259 29 0.11 27 27 93.1%

Therrell Health Science & Research 240 25 0.10 4 17 21 84.0%

Therrell Law Govn & Public Policy 243 25 0.10 23 23 92.0%

Carver School of the Arts 343 31 0.09 7 1 18 26 83.9%

Maynard Jackson High School 954 86 0.09 8 72 80 93.0%

Charles R. Drew Charter Academy 196 14 0.07 8 1 1 10 71.4%

Carver School of Technology 285 18 0.06 15 0 1 16 88.9%

Carver School of Health Sciences 304 18 0.06 1 0 13 14 77.8%

BEST Academy High School 212 12 0.06 1 4 5 10 83.3%

Carver Early College 316 13 0.04 0 0 13 13 100.0%

North Atlanta High School 1574 64 0.04 27 3 31 61 95.3%

Total 11556 2134 0.18 482 259 889 1630 76.4%

9

Three Categories of Grade Changes: to Letter Grades

As was noted above, there were only 23 cases in 2014-2015 where the final grade in transcript was changed to a letter grade. As can be seen below, the cases were limited to five schools including two of the alternative schools/programs: Crim Open Campus and West End Academy. A review of the data show that in the majority of cases the final was either an F or an NG. A grade of F was used in cases where little or no work was completed by the student, and NG was used in similar cases and in a few instances where transcripts had not yet arrived from another school. Grade Changes to Letter Grades

School Enroll- ment

# of Changes

Changes per Enrolled Student

Failing to Letter

Letter to Letter

Passing to Letter

All Changes to Letter Grades

% Changes that are to Letter Grades

Coretta Scott King Academy HS 244 241 0.99 0 0.0%

South Atlanta Law and Social Justice 266 258 0.97 0 0.0%

Forrest Hill Academy 143 93 0.65 0 0.0%

KIPP Atlanta Collegiate 499 181 0.36 0 0 0 0.0%

Alonzo Crim Open Campus 322 111 0.34 8 8 7.2%

Frederick Douglass High School 776 243 0.31 6 2 8 3.3%

Henry W. Grady High School 1286 269 0.21 2 2 0.7%

South Atlanta Health & Medical Sciences 278 51 0.18 0 0.0%

Benjamin E. Mays High School 1614 292 0.18 0 0.0%

West End Academy PLC 171 28 0.16 3 3 10.7%

South Atlanta Computer Design 267 32 0.12 0 0.0%

Therrell S.T.E.M.S 259 29 0.11 0 0.0%

Therrell Health Science & Research 240 25 0.10 0 0.0%

Therrell Law Govn & Public Policy 243 25 0.10 0 0.0%

Carver School of the Arts 343 31 0.09 0 0 0 0 0.0%

Maynard Jackson High School 954 86 0.09 0 0.0%

Charles R. Drew Charter Academy 196 14 0.07 0 0.0%

Carver School of Technology 285 18 0.06 0 0 0 0 0.0%

Carver School of Health Sciences 304 18 0.06 0 0 0 0 0.0%

BEST Academy High School 212 12 0.06 1 1 2 16.7%

Carver Early College 316 13 0.04 0 0 0 0 0.0%

North Atlanta High School 1574 64 0.04 0 0.0%

Booker T Washington HS 764 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.0%

Total 11556 2134 0.18 15 4 4 23 1.1%

10

Use of Paper Grade-Change Form

As can be seen below, in some schools there were large differences in the number of grade change forms completed compared to the total number of grade changes as identified by the IC Transcript Audit Reports. In some cases, it may be that grade changes were made prior to the gradebook grades being posted to the transcript file. (This appears to be the case for Forrest Hill Academy and West End where grades were produced in the GradPoint or Edgenuity system and then manually entered in the IC grade files, and approval forms were completed.) As a result, the number of forms actually exceeded the number of cases where there was a difference between the gradebook and the transcript file. More typically, in cases such as CSK, Douglass, Mays, and South Atlanta Law and Social Justice, there were many more changes than completed forms. (For Douglass HS, it should be noted that in 62 cases grades were changed from 0 to 1 because the state does not accept a score of zero on student record, and the changes were needed so the grades could be sent to the Georgia Department of Education.) Use of Paper Grade-Change Form

2014-15 Completed Grade Change Forms

2014-15 Total Grade Changes

Difference

BEST 8 12 4

Carver Arts 46 31 -15

Carver Health Science Research 12 18 6

Carver Early College 42 13 -29

Carver Technology 58 18 -40

Crim Open Campus 98 110 12

Coretta Scott King (CSK) 103 241 138

Frederick Douglass 102 243 141

Forrest Hills 219 93 -126

Henry W. Grady 206 269 63

Maynard Jackson 0 86 86

Benjamin E. Mays 24 292 268

North Atlanta 44 64 20

South Atlanta CAD 28 32 4

South Atlanta Health and Med. Science 43 51 8

South Atlanta Law and Social Justice 180 258 78

Therrell 34 79 45

BT Washington 6 0 -6

West End 104 28 -76

Total 1357 1938 581

Most Common Reasons for Grade Changes

Based on the Infinite Campus data and discussions with teachers, principals and registrars, the most common reasons that grades are changed are outlined below. 1. The most common reasons for grade changes were the completion of missing assignments, completion of

recovery assignments and completion of remediation work. According to the Infinite Campus Transcript Audit Reports, 388 students grades were changed after the student completed recovery assignments, missing assignments, or remediation assignments. In all 388 cases, the grades were changed from either a letter grades (e.g., incomplete) to passing grades or from a failing (numerical) grades to passing grades.

Overall, 482 grades were changed from failing to passing, and 259 grades were changed from letter grades to passing grades. Therefore, this recovery category accounts for 52% of these changes. (This percentage is based on the information available (e.g., discussions with staff). It is likely that more of the changes were the result of assignments being made-up or recovery/remediation assignments being completed.)

11

2. The second most common reason was in cases where the school had not notified parents of failing grades and decided to post letter grades until the parent notifications were done. For example, in 2014-2015 there were 123 cases at Coretta Scott King HS where student grades were changed from an Incomplete (I) to a failing grade after the school notified the parents (as required by APS policy).

3. At two schools, most of the grade changes occurred after the first semester. According to one principal, this is because grades are posted and report cards are distributed, and then after the winter break, students and parents disputed the grades. In cases where the teacher agreed to correct or change grades, the changes are documented using the Grade Change Form. After the principal approves the change, the registrar changes the grade on the transcript directly either because the teacher or registrar does not think that they can update the gradebook at that point or because they want to document formally the change though the paper process.

4. At a third (alternative) school, Forrest Hill Academy, the online program was not started until late in the first semester. As a result, a number of students did not complete the units of study by the end of the grading period in January 2015. As a result, in 50 cases, grades were changed to 69 because students did not have the full 15 weeks to complete the classes. At the end of the school year, in 15 cases, grades were changed to passing grades when the student completed the Forrest Hill Academy summer academy.

5. At one school, 31 grade changes were made because the gradebooks for multiple music classes taught by the same teacher were set up incorrectly. There were, apparently, a couple of other cases at Grady HS where teachers set up the gradebook incorrectly and had to correct the grades after grades were posted.

6. Also at one school, 23 grades were changed in order to add the 10 points students earned because the classes were Advanced Placement (AP) courses. This same correction was made at a second high school where 14 grades were changed to add the 10 extra point for AP courses. (In most cases, teachers build the AP credits into the gradebook but not in a few cases.)

7. At another school, there were 58 cases where grades of 0 were changed to grades of 1. These changes were made because the state system does not permitted grades of 0 to be posted to transcript.

8. In 12 cases, the reason that grades were changed was that transcripts were received from Georgia State University (GSU) or Atlanta Metropolitan College (AMC) after the grades had already been posted. Nearly all of these cases were at Mays HS (11).

9. At one high school, 14 students Advanced Algebra grades were changed from Incompletes to passing grades after the students completed a special math project.

Process for Changing Grades

APS provides annual training on the use of the SIS and the teacher gradebook. Training materials include a detailed Infinite Campus manual that outlines how a teacher gradebook should be developed and how grades should be entered. APS employs full-time staff who provide ongoing support to schools on the use of the SIS.

However, even experienced teachers make mistakes in setting up the gradebook or entering their grades. In addition, according to Infinite Campus staff, some teachers are less comfortable building and using the automated gradebook than other teachers. In addition, in some cases, teachers are on leave during the grading periods and may not be available to enter grades at the campus; in other cases, teachers may be new to the school (e.g., mid-year hires), and may have little experience or training on the use of the gradebook. Similarly, some registrars may be relatively new to the district, and therefore, not be able to assist new or inexperienced teachers. These, and other factors, may account for some teachers posting grades late and/or asking registrars to update manually the transcript file.

1. The frequency and reasons that grades are changed vary somewhat across schools. The variations across schools are, in part, because schools have different programs such as unit recovery and mastery grading, partnerships with GSU and AMC, and different procedures for awarding credit for AP classes and notifying parents of possible failing grades.

For example, two schools, Douglass HS and South Atlanta School of Law and Social Justice, appear to be unique in that in 2014-2015 they had the largest number of cases where the use of remedial assignment, unit recovery, and mastery grading were employed to provide students additional time and opportunities to pass

12

courses or improve low grades. Of the 388 such cases noted above, the larger majority were from these two schools although several other schools employed the same practices including KIPP Collegiate, Alonzo Crim Open Campus, Forrest Hill, and the South Atlanta School of Health, Science, and Research.

2. Typically, grades are entered and, in some cases, changed as follows:

a. Teacher gradebooks may vary considerably based on the subject taught and the number of grades that teachers include in student grades. Variations may include the inclusion of homework, classwork, tests, essays, projects, quizzes, and other assignments.

b. Teachers update their gradebook throughout the school year as students take tests and complete assignments. At the conclusion of each quarter, there is a window of about 7-15 days where the teachers can make corrections and additions to the grade book.

c. Before the end of these windows, the teacher must post the final grades to a grade score file. This file is used at appropriate points during the school year to produce student report cards. Once the window is closed, if a school needs to make corrections or changes, the school must request an extension from the central office SIS team (who can, as appropriate, reopen the window).

For example, in spring 2015 the school and grading calendar was as follows:

May 22 Last day of classes for students

May 27 Last day for teachers (190 day employees)

May 27 Infinite Campus Grading Window closed (last day for teachers to post grades)

June 17 closing date for state student record used to calculate CCRPI

July 15 final date district is required to post all grades to transcript and send to GADOE.

d. After final grades are posted by teachers, and the grade change window is closed (at the end of each quarter), the central SIS team posts the final grades to the transcript file. The only way to modify the transcript file is to manually make changes. In other words, schools can only post to the transcript file once; they cannot repost from their gradebook to modify the transcript file.

e. The purpose of the transcript file is to provide official grades to the State of Georgia (e.g., for use in awarding Hope scholarships to students with GPAs greater than 3.0).

f. While schools can continue to correct and update grades after the transcript file is sent to the state, these changes will not be applied to the file that was sent to the Georgia Department of Education.

g. It is this mandatory process of posting grades, closing windows, and then posting official grades to the state (i.e., Georgia Department of Education) that results in cases where the grades in the teachers gradebooks (and/or the grade score files) do not match the grades in the transcript file.

3. The large majority of grade changes take place at the end of each semester, although for students on 4 X 4 schedules grade changes are also likely at the end of each quarter.

4. Why would anyone, other than a teacher, be allowed to enter or change grades? There are several cases where it would be important for other staff members to be able to access, enter and changes grades. For example, there are frequent cases or instances where teachers leave school unexpectedly, or where they are ill or have a family emergency, or there is a long-term substitute teacher for a course, and so on. In these cases, it is important that students grades are posted and reported as required for report cards and state reporting.

13

Findings and Recommendations

As noted above, the findings of this report are based largely a review of data from the IC Transcript Audit Reports. Data for the past three years were reviewed. However, to understand and document current practices, procedures, and reasons for grade changes, a detailed review of the 2014-2015 data was conducted. In general, except for one school, the Transcript Audit Report data for 2012-2013, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015 are similar (see table below).

Number of Grade Changes (by year)

2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

District Total 2332 3471 2134

The one significant exception, in terms of the number of changes, was in 2013-2014 at South Atlanta School of Law and Social Justice where there were 793 grade changes. (Because of complaints from staff about practices at the school, an investigation of the schools practices was begun last fall and completed in May 2015. This is one the eight investigations that were completed earlier this year and are noted above.) It should also be noted that the number of grade changes varies somewhat by school across years. To better understand these variations, as part of this review, particular attention was given to schools with larger number of grade changes in 2014-2015, and the finding are discussed below. This examination included not only a review of the data, but also interviews with appropriate central office staff, teachers, registrars, and principals. Although 2,134 grade changes may appear to be a large number, it is important to note that in 2014-2015, there were 11,556 high school students and each students received about 16 grades. In other words, the 2,134 changes were in relation to about 185,000 total grades for these students. This is a rate of approximately 1 change out of every 100 grades. It might be assumed that all grade changes result in students receiving higher grades, or a change from a failing to a passing grade. However, the data show a more complex set of circumstances and outcomes. For example, of the 2,134 changes, in only 50% of the cases was a numeric grade changed to a higher grade; in 24.9% of the cases the grade was changed from a letter grade (e.g., incomplete) to a numeric grade; and in 25% of the cases the students actually received lower grades. Similarly, in less than half (741) of these changes were either from failing to passing grades or from letter grades (such as incompletes) to passing grades. In many cases (889), while there was a grade change, it was correcting or changing a passing grade to another higher or lower passing grade. The third big category of changes was grade changes that resulted in failing final grades (481). The last small group (23) were grade changes that resulted in letter grades such as incompletes. In regard to the reasons for grade changes, again the circumstances and reasons vary among schools. As already noted, over the past year, APS has completed eight investigations involving inappropriate grade changes (four from the 2013-2014 school year and four from the 2014-2015 school year). This review did not identify additional cases of serious inappropriate actions, although we did find inconsistencies in practice, lack of clarity in process, and a lack of the necessary safeguards to prevent inappropriate activity. It is important to note that this review was largely a data review. It focused specifically on data changes in the Infinite Campus Transcript Audit Reports. Staff also reviewed and compared the data from the audit reports with the data on the paper change forms used by schools. Additionally, interviews were conducted with central office staff, teachers, registrars, and nine high school principals to review and analyze school and district practices, district procedures and policies, and specific cases where large numbers of changes were made in 2014-2015. However, it is important to note that, moving forward, the district will implement new workflow requirements and closely monitor grade changes, and will continue to investigate thoroughly any additional accusations of wrongdoing and/or inappropriate or questionable practices. (The district maintains a hot line for anyone to

14

anonymously call to reports misconduct, and employees, stakeholders, parents, and students are strongly encouraged either to use the hot line or to contact directly the APS Employee Relations office or the Superintendents office if they are concerned about any conduct, practice, or policy that seems questionable or inappropriate.)

Among the recommendations presented in the report are several related to processes, policies, training, and monitoring. It is clear from the review that the schools and district must improve in these areas to ensure the integrity of the students grades. The following sections outline the major specific finding related to grade changes. After each finding, a set of recommendations or options are outlined. The findings are organized into two categories: Consistency of Practice and Safeguards and Controls.

Consistency of Practice

1. There appear to be inconsistencies in grading practices related to mastery grading.

Therefore, it is recommended that training and written procedures be developed and disseminated to guide the implementation of unit recovery programs and or mastery grading. Key issues and practices that must be addressed in the development of these procedures include:

A mastery-grading approach provides students as many opportunities and as much time as possible to improve their performance, skills, and knowledge, and show that they have mastered them or met the standard.

However, to the extent possible, these opportunities should occur throughout the school year or semester; if possible, teachers should not be waiting until the end of the semester or year to ensure that students have multiple opportunities to learn and show what they can do. Similarly, students also should not be waiting until the last minute to try to improve their grades.

However, it should also be noted that it is not the goal of mastery-based grading to require every teacher to implement the program in exactly the same way. Teachers will continue to have flexibility to determine how and when additional time and opportunities will be provided to students (e.g., which tests, quizzes, assignments, projects, and writing assignments).

2. Similarly, there appear to be inconsistencies in grade changing practices related to credit recovery.

Again, clear guidance, policies, and training are needed to ensure consistent and equitable implementation of credit recovery courses. Guidance concerning credit recovery must include following procedures and requirements:

Since grades for Edgenuity courses are not entered like other grades in the teachers gradebook, they should be entered in the Grade Score file, and then posted to the transcript (just as others grades are posted).

Like all other grades, grades for credit recovery classes should be entered prior the close of the grading window. (When this is done, a grade change form would not be needed since it grading would be completed within the allowable grading window.)

In order to take a credit recovery course, a student must have already taken and received a failing grade in the course.

If a student successfully completes a credit recovery course, the grade for that course does not replace the previous failed grade; both grades will appear on the students transcript and both will receive equal weight in the students Grade Point Average (GPA).

Typically, credit recovery courses begin with the student taking a pretest to determine which standards the student has already mastered, and what standards (portion of the curriculum) must repeat. As a result, the time required for students to complete the courses will vary widely depending on past mastery, and the speed at which students learn and work.

15

Grades should be entered as students complete the course; teachers do not need to wait until the end of the semester to enter grades when a student completes a course early.

3. As noted above, the IC manual outlines the procedures for creating a gradebook and posting grades. However,

our review suggests that there are inconsistencies and misunderstandings about when and how grade changes can be made. In addition, the data suggest that there is inconsistency concerning when grade changes need to be documented. (For example, the data show that different practices are used across schools in cases where a teacher corrects an error before grades are posted, before the grading window closes, before report cards are sent home, and/or before the transcript file is posted.)

Therefore, it is recommended that several new procedural and document control functions be implemented (see Safeguards and Controls below), and that policies and procedures concerning grading must be clarified and/or developed to ensure clarity and consistency.

4. It appears that while schools used similar forms that included similar information, one official form to

document Grade Changes and approvals has not been developed and/or disseminated for use by all schools.

Therefore, it is recommended that a new SharePoint form be created. In addition, a new workflow approval process must be developed and implemented (see details below).

5. Within the Infinite Campus (IC) system, schools use of the comment field has been inconsistent. Some schools include a reason, date, and other information while other schools provide limited information, and some schools frequently do not use the comment box at all (at least not for all changes).

If the above (#4) recommendations to develop a SharePoint form and SharePoint approval flow process are implemented, it is recommended that schools not be required to complete the same type of information in the IC comment field.

However, if it is determined that the IC comment field must be used (e.g., in addition to or instead of the SharePoint form and process) it is recommended that the user-defined text boxes within the transcript function be marked as required fields whenever a transcript is modified. The text box can hold up to 255 alphanumeric characters, and it is recommended that the field must include the reason for the change, name of the person changing the grade, date the grade was changed, and the grade change request number generated when the request is approved.

6. In regard to the use of letter grades, again there appears to be inconsistency in how letter grades are used. For example, one school apparently used the letter P in a way that most other schools used the letter I to indicate that the students grade/work was incomplete at the time grades were reported and that the student has been offered additional time and opportunities to completed missed, late, or inadequate work.

It is recommended that to comply with board policy, the use of alpha characters for grades 4-12 will be restricted to I-Incomplete and NG-No grade/evaluation. In addition, all letter grades would be required to be updated to numeric grades within some specific, reasonable period of time. (Currently, the policy is that teachers have 4.5 weeks to update letter grades. This allows a teacher, for example, to update grades in the fall for letter grades given in the spring.) If the teacher does not update a letter grade during this period, the IC system or team would automatically update all such letter grades to the grade in the teachers gradebook.

Safeguards and Controls

7. As noted above, there appears to inconsistency and poor controls related to grade changes, the documentation of changes, following the appropriate approval process, and completion of the comment fields in Infinite Campus.

Therefore, in addition to a new SharePoint form, a new workflow approval process must be developed and implemented. As part of the approval process, it would be required that after the grading window closes, all grade change requests be approved by the Principal and Associate Superintendent before generating an approval number. Once the changes are approved, the approval would be forwarded to the central office IC team. Only the central office IC team will be permitted to make grade changes after the grading window

16

closes. In addition, in the past, the central office did not have a way to monitor the approvals or changes. Going forward, the IC team would be automatically notified of all grade changes. Once the approval process is completed, the parent(s) would be automatically notified through the Infinite Campus Messenger. (It should be noted that the practicality of this recommendation assumes that these new procedures and additional training will reduce of the number of changes to a more manageable number.)

8. Currently, all school staff (including teachers, registrars, administrators, and secretaries) have access to the

grading-by-task tool that permits anyone to manually enter grades into the final grade score file to directly to transcript. This is a serious issue and virtually eliminates all controls over grade changing.

It is recommended that access to the grading-by task tool will be removed for all personnel. Charter schools that do not use a traditional grading scale will receive access on a school-by-school basis.

9. Similarly, it appears that there are too many people who have access and the ability to change grades.

(Currently, there are 484 unique users that have access to the registrar role in Infinite Campus that gives users the ability to write and edit transcripts.)

Therefore, as part of the new effort to control the workflow approval process, the registrar rights would be reset for all employees. Only two people per middle and high schools would then be given registrar rights.4 Other staff (e.g., clerks and guidance counselors) would be given registration and enrollment rights but they would not be able to access any student transcripts.

10. As noted above, once the grades are finalized and posted to the grade score file, the IC Grading Window is closed, and a few days later either the school or CLL staff post the scores to the transcript file. According to CLL staff, if a school does not post the grade then the Infinite Campus team posts the schools grades to the transcript file so that CLL staff can then send (post) the official grades to the GADOE.

However, in what appears to be an unusual practice, apparently schools can still manually change the transcript file at any time (even years later) although these changes are not sent to the state.

Therefore, as outlined above as part of the new approval workflow process, the ability for a school to change transcripts after the grading window is closed will be eliminated.

11. In the past, school and central office staff did not regularly monitor grading practices or grade changes.

Therefore, as part of the new safeguards concerning grading practices, reports will be added to the data dashboards that were developed in 2014-2015 to assist administrators with monitoring teacher gradebooks and grade changes. These dashboards will, for example, identify:

All grade changes at the teacher, school, and district level

Courses where the teachers have not identified grading tasks

Course sections with grades (in gradebook) that do total 100%

Missing gradebook setups

Cases where there is no gradebook activity within some defined period of time

Courses with invalid state codes

The IC manager will be responsible for regularly monitoring and publishing the transcript audit report.

This report provides detailed data, analysis, findings and recommendations. Over the next few weeks, the district will continue to examine related policies and practices. In some cases, it seems clear that additional guidance and training for administrators, registrars, and teachers are needed. While this report is an important step, it will be critical to involve all stakeholders as we continue to improve our standard operating procedures, policies, communication, and training.

4 A person with registration rights would be able to add or edit names, addresses, and other demographic information, for example; a person with enrollment rights would be able to build a students schedule; and a person with registrar rights would be add/edit demographic data, schedule a student, and add and edit student transcripts (except for grade changes which must be done by central office IC staff).