American Journal of Educational Research
ISSN (Print): 2327-6126 ISSN (Online): 2327-6150 Website: Editor-in-chief: Ratko Pavlović
Open Access
Journal Browser
American Journal of Educational Research. 2020, 8(9), 622-632
DOI: 10.12691/education-8-9-3
Open AccessArticle

Teachers’ Perception of Letter Grading System and Its Challenges a Qualitative Study in Vyas Municipality of Tanahun

Bharat Kafle1,

1Social Science and Education, Nepal Open University, Lalitpur, Nepal

Pub. Date: September 11, 2020

Cite this paper:
Bharat Kafle. Teachers’ Perception of Letter Grading System and Its Challenges a Qualitative Study in Vyas Municipality of Tanahun. American Journal of Educational Research. 2020; 8(9):622-632. doi: 10.12691/education-8-9-3


This article has been written on the issues of teachers’ perception of the Letter Grading System (LGS) and its challenges in the context of Vyas Municipality of Tanahun along the current academic years of 2020. Its purpose is to explore the teachers’ perception of LGS and identify how to face the major challenges of it. This study is based on phenomenological design and preferred to social constructivism on the concern of postmodernism. I employ purposeful sampling methods and use a tool of a semi-structured interview protocol for data collection. Basically, the teachers’ experience is found about the LGS that is positively relevant, applicable, enthusiastic, and appropriate for challenging the education system in Nepal. However, students and their parents’ perceptions are being simply ensuing liberal promotion policy with an upgrade to their child without any obstructions. Thus, there is a gap between the practices of the evaluation procedure and the perception of teachers about the LGS for getting betterment of students ‘output. As I explore, the LGS has measured the student’s competency and cognitive domain on the basis of nine progressive scales in regard to their providing performance opportunity. At last but not least, through the opinion of experience teacher, I conclude that LGS has, however, biased less, accountable, fruitful, and merit-based measuring tools of evaluation in the field of education without incorporated non-standardized tests in school evaluation at present. If possible, to incorporate non-testing devices as assignment, LGS has far better in evaluation procedure in school evaluation system in modern times.

letter grading perception evaluation challenges teachers

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit


[1]  T. M. Haladyna, S. M. Downing, and M. C. Rodriguez, “A Review of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Guidelines for Classroom Assessment,” Appl. Meas. Educ., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 309-333, 2002.
[2]  F. Elikai and P. W. Schuhmann, “An examination of the impact of grading policies on students’achievement,” Issues Account. Educ., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 677-693, 2010.
[3]  J. Schneider and E. Hutt, “Making the grade: a history of the A-F marking scheme,” J. Curric. Stud., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 201-224, 2014.
[4]  Thomas R. Guskey & Robert Thomas, “Perception of Teachers’ about Grading,” J. Curric. Stud., vol. 4, no. 7, p. 2, 2001.
[5]  CERID, “A Narrative Report of Proceeding of the National Seminar on Letter Grading System: Implication and its Impacts in Higher Education,” vol. 2016, no. 22 February, 2016.
[6]  Kohn, “A History of Grading,” J. Curric. Stud., vol. 3, no. 6, 1999.
[7]  J. Malouff, “Bias in Grading,” Coll. Teach., vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 191-192, 2008.
[8]  A. KOHN, “The Case Against Grades,” Educ. Leadersh. Educ. Dig., no. January, pp. 8-16, 2012.
[9]  J. Schinske and K. Tanner, “Feature Approaches to Biology Teaching and Learning Teaching More by Grading Less (or Differently ),” CBE-Life Sci. Educ., vol. 13, pp. 159-166, 2014.
[10]  M. P. Wagle, “New SLC grading system reflects students’ capability better,”, 2016.
[11]  R. Sawyer, “Beyond Correlations: Usefulness of High School GPA and Test Scores in Making College Admissions Decisions,” Appl. Meas. Educ., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 89-112, 2013.
[12]  A. Martinez, “Parent Involvement and Its Effects on Student,” Califonia State Univ. Stanislaus, no. May, 2015.
[13]  CERID, “School Effectiveness in Nepal: A Synthesis of Indicators,” no. July, 2002.
[14]  Malouff, “Effects of Grading on Student Learning and Alternative Assessment Strategies,” J. Curric. Stud., 2008.
[15]  R. M. Krawczyk, “Effects of Grading on Student Learning and Alternative Assessment Strategies,” Eff. Grading Student Learn. Altern. Assess. Strateg. p. 45, 2017.
[16]  C. Reddy, “Grading System in Education: Advantages and Disadvantages,” Journal of Education and Educational Development, p. 3, 2016.
[17]  T. Isaacs, Assessment in Education in England, vol. 9, no. 1. 2012.
[18]  D. M. Yesbeck, “Grading practices: Teachers’ considerations of academic and non-academic factors,” ProQuest Diss. Theses, pp. 31-164, 2011.
[19]  J. S. Turner, “The relationship between secondary school teacher perception of student motivation and the effects of teacher professional development on student motivation.” vol. 68, no. 10-A, p. 4248, 2008.
[20]  T. R. Guskey and L. J. Link, “Exploring the factors teachers consider in determining students’ grades,” Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 303-320, 2019.
[21]  T. R. G. and S. M. Brookhart, “What We Know about Grading,” in The Science News-Letter, vol. 11, no. 306, 2019, p. 115.
[22]  R. Simon, M., Tierney, R. D., Forgette-Giroux, R., Charland, J., Noonan, B., & Duncan, “A secondary school teacher’s description of the process of determining report card grades,” McGill J. Educ., vol. 45, pp. 535-554, 2010.
[23]  S. M. Brookhart et al., “A Century of Grading Research: Meaning and Value in the Most Common Educational Measure,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 803-848, 2016.
[24]  Starch, “Reliability of grading high school work in english, maths ad science,” J. Educ. Educ. Dev., vol. 21, no. 3, 1913.
[25]  D. Starch, “Can the variability of marks be reduced?,” Sch. Soc., vol. 2, pp. 242-243, 1915.
[26]  G. of N. Ministry of Education, LGS Nerdeshika First amendment 2073.12. Kathmandu, 2016, pp. 1-10.
[27]  K. B. Cox, “Putting Classroom Grading on the Table: A Reform in Progress,” Am. Second. Educ., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 67-87, 2011.
[28]  K. O. Connor, “Part 1: How to Grade for Learning Presented by,” p. 156, 2009.
[29]  J. A. Erickson, “a_call_to_action_transforming_grading_practices Eriksion Jaffrine A.pdf,” in Principal Leadership, pp. 42-46.
[30]  S. M. Brookhart, “Teachers’ Grading: Practice and Theory,” Appl. Meas. Educ., vol. 7, no. 2009, pp. 279-301, 1994.
[31]  Youyi Sun and Liying Cheng, “Teachers’ grading practices: Meaning and Values assigned,” Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 326-343, 2014.
[32]  L. A. (2014) Swan, G. M., Guskey, T. R., & Jung, “Parents’ and Teachers’ perception of Standards-based and Traditional Report Cards.,” Educ. Assessment, Eval. Account. vol. 26, pp. 289-299, 2014.
[33]  T. R. Guskey, “Grading-5-0-Alternatives.pdf,” in Zero alternatives, Principle Leadership, 2004, pp. 49-53.
[34]  T. R. Guskey, “Making High School Grades Meaningful,” Phi Delta Kappa Int., vol. 87, no. 9, pp. 670-675, 2011.
[35]  J. H. McMillan, “Secondary Teachers’ classroom assessment and grading practices.” Educ. Meas. issues Pract., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 20-32, 2001.
[36]  M. Simon & Schusternd, “Nora Rowley, 5th graders view of grades in Clements. A.,” Rep. Card, pp. 72-73, 2004.
[37]  J. W. Creswell, QUALITATIVE INQUIRY & RESEARCH DESIGN, 3RD ed. USA: SABE Publications.Inc. 2013.
[38]  C. O. Boyd, “Phenomenology the Method,” Nurshing Res. A Qual. Perspect., pp. 93-122, 2001.
[39]  J. Creswell, Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.
[40]  Y. K. Djamba and W. L. Neuman, Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Pearson Ne., vol. 30, no. 3. USA: Pearson Education Limited, 2011.
[41]  H. Venden Berg, “Qualitative Social Research,” Reanalyzing Qual. interviews from Differ. Angl. risk decontextualization other Probl. Shar. Qual. data. vol. 6, no. 1, 2005.
[42]  B. S. Marriam, Qualitative research and case study applications in education. USA: San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Oxford: Routledge. 1998.
[43]  P. F. and M. L. Jonathan A. Smith, “Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory Method and Research (Book Review),” no. January. Sage, 2009.
[44]  C. S. DWECK, MINDSET_The New Psychology of Success. NEW YORK: RANDOM HOUSE NEW YORK, 2006.
[45]  M. Crotty, “THE FOUNDATIONS OF SOCIAL RESEARCH: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process,” SAGE Publ., p. (9) 280, 1998.
[46]  L.H Cross & R.B.Frary, “Hodgepodge grading: Endorsed by students and teachers alike,” Appl. Meas. Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 53-72, 1999.
[47]  D. Iamarino, “The benefits of standards-based grading: A critical evaluation of modern grading practices,” Curr. Issues Educ., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1-9, 2014.
[48]  Z. Munzur, “Reflections on the Impact of Absence of Summative Assessment on Students’ Motivation and Learning,” J. Educ. Futur., vol. 5, no. 2, 2014.
[49]  J. M. S. &T. R. M. Douglas, “Sociology of education: an A-to-Z guide.” (J. Ainsworth, Ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA SAGE Publ. Inc., 2013.
[50]  T. R. Guskey, “Making the grade: What benefits students?,” Educ. Leadership., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 14-20, 1994.
[51]  J. Khanal, “Corporal Punishment in Nepalese Private Schools: Perception of Teachers,” J. Am. Acad. Res., vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 1-9, 2015.