ºÚÂí´ÅÁ¦

Many IU students feel the pressure to get good grades. Leo Cavinder thinks about grading for an entirely different reason: he’s working on several research projects analyzing grading and the high school graduation rate.

Cavinder is pursuing a dual major in political science and education policy through the individualized major program. His passion for education began early when he was only in first grade. Later, he realized his passion for education should be turned into one of advocacy that would make a difference for those in schools, leading him to pursue political science. In high school, he stumbled upon Professor Janet Decker’s textbook, Legal Rights, which he bought and read, and his future clicked into place: he was going to pursue the field of education law and policy.

While completing his degree, Cavinder has become immersed in the research and manuscript process. He’s now working on three research projects on grading and the graduation rate, including one that looks at all the state laws and regulations with respect to grading and looks for themes and trends and another that studies undergraduate seniors’ perceptions about K-12 grading, with a concentration on if education majors and non-education majors have any differences in those. Cavinder has also been working with Chris Lubienski in the Center for Evaluation and ºÚÂí´ÅÁ¦ Policy, which has allowed him to continue to dive into the field and look at other topics in education policy that are not just about grading and the graduation rate. 

The research topic of grading has been a personal interest of Cavinder’s ever since his own high school experience when a new grading system was introduced mid-semester and almost immediately reverted to the previous system: “This whole incident inspired me because I remember thinking that I did not know what a good grading method was,” Cavinder explained. “Why should I outright criticize the new grading scale if it was actually an improvement? Was the new grading scale by the principal actually better? And what exactly makes grading better? As these questions went through my mind, my research interests began.”

In collaboration with Professor Decker, Cavinder will be presenting findings of all U.S. grading statutes and regulations from the 50 U.S. states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico this November at the ºÚÂí´ÅÁ¦ Law Association Annual Meeting. They’ll also be addressing new questions in grading practices, such as can a student’s grade be lowered for disciplinary or attendance reasons and what rights do students have if they disagree with a grade? What about teachers who disagree with district grading policies? 

“Our work focuses on students’ right to due process, equal protection, and privacy, as well as teachers’ employment rights,” he said. “We hope our analysis will help provide a more up-to-date and comprehensive understanding for PK-12 practitioners, attorneys, and scholars.”

Diving into research as an undergraduate has helped Cavinder improve in other areas as a college student.

“I think this work has made me not jump to conclusions so easily about issues. Instead, I hold my initial thoughts and conduct research before taking a stance, considering what would work and what would not. I also think it has made me a better writer and reader,” he said. “Even things like time management have changed for me in how I block out when to read, when to write, and how to get into a state of productivity. It has made me constantly look for questions and identity gaps in research, for instance, and I will randomly think of research questions.”

Those questions helped Cavinder achieve his first peer-reviewed article that will be published in the Journal of School Administration Research and Development (JSARD). His article begins by identifying the pressure that school administrators face to raise their graduation rate from government actors and community members, leading some to resort to amending grading practices to increase that rate. Cavinder contends that while it may give the impression of improvement, it is unauthentic and likely ineffective. A paper from Professor Rob Kunzman included a line that stood out to Cavinder: “…[T]he graduation rate – an empty measure of quality if ever there was one. Then the motivation becomes getting the students out the door, and time trumps learning.” 

“That is really what this paper is getting at: that the focus has become getting students out the door in the sense of amending grading practices rather than learning,” Cavinder explained. “I contend that principals must not resort to that level because it only harms students, as they will graduate underprepared.”