The introduction of grades in the 19th century had a clear goal: to democratise education. Study and training places were to be allocated according to performance, not origin. Grades were considered objective, comparable and transparent – and were intended to enable fair selection. Proponents still argue these points today: School grades make performance visible, allow comparisons to be made and provide a basis for decision-making for transitions and applications. The awarding of grades is regulated by law and relates to oral, written and practical performance. However, many educational researchers and practitioners are in favour of alternative forms of performance assessment that are individual rather than comparative and take greater account of learning development. The closer you look, the clearer it becomes that the current assumptions about school grades do not correspond to reality.
A grade is more than a number – or is it less? A grade of ‘2’ in German says little about whether a child can write well, read well or is grammatically confident. The overall grade is a sum of partial performances and summarises various sub-areas. This smoothes out individual strengths and weaknesses and thus reduces the informative value of school grades. What’s more, studies show that grades are influenced by many factors that have little to do with performance. Studies by the Universities of Zurich and Bern have shown that gender, origin and body weight have a measurable influence on assessment – regardless of actual performance. A slim girl from an academic household is more likely to get a good grade than, for example, a boy with a higher BMI and an immigrant background. The school grades are therefore by no means as valid, objective or reliable as they seem – criteria that should actually apply to a fair assessment.
School grades are supposed to create comparability – but that often doesn’t work. Why? Because grades are usually based on the respective learning group. Grades do not reflect the objective level of performance, but rather the ranking within a class. This means that, based on the assumption of normal distribution, an average performance in a high-performing class can lead to a ‘4’, but in a lower-performing class to a ‘2’. Grades are also hardly comparable between different teachers, schools or federal states – because different curricula, assessment standards and pedagogical cultures apply. It becomes even more difficult when grades are processed mathematically. Converting scores into grades distorts the meaningfulness of the assessment because grades are not real numerical values – they are grades. The frequently used grade point average is therefore often a ‘fictitious accuracy’ that should actually only be used as a guide.
Many schools and countries are experimenting and working with other forms of performance feedback – from report cards to portfolio work. In Hamburg, schools are allowed to do without school grades up to Year 8. In Schleswig-Holstein, Bavaria and other federal states, (primary) schools rely on learning development interviews and so-called grid reports, in which a child’s individual skills and abilities are assessed in detail. The advantage of these methods is that they show exactly where strengths and weaknesses lie in a more differentiated way – and thus enable targeted support.
One particularly promising approach is formative assessment. In contrast to summative assessment, which is used to award grades at the end of a learning unit, formative assessment takes place continuously during the learning process. The aim is to provide pupils with targeted feedback so that they can better assess their learning progress and actively work on improvements themselves. Self-assessment also plays an important role here. Learning should be adapted in the process and steered in the right direction. In practice, the teacher should use formative test procedures to find out where the entire class stands, who still needs individual support, where a different method might be helpful or who is underchallenged and bored. Possible methods for formative assessments are, for example:
Errors in formative tests should not only be tolerated, but can even accelerate learning if they are sensibly provoked and reflected upon. Therefore, they should not be mixed with summative grading, i.e. they should only serve as information on the learning status and not be a reason for a poor grade. 
Particularly important in formative assessment is the iterative assessment, which makes it possible to visualise learning development over a longer period of time. Repeated assessments not only show a one-off level of performance, but also a learning progression that provides information on how competences are developing. Such procedures offer teachers the opportunity to recognise at an early stage where support is needed – and where progress has already been made.
Various schools are already successfully implementing alternative forms of assessment. At Waldorf schools and in some model schools, school grades are completely dispensed with until the ninth grade. Instead, presentations, portfolios and regular development discussions are used. Alternative concepts are also being trialled in mainstream schools:
All of these methods have one major advantage: they make it easier to visualise what a child can do. The more facets are included in the assessment, the fairer it becomes. Joint discussions also help to build understanding and trust between all those involved. The Waldparkschule in Heidelberg, for example, shows that alternative assessment systems work. There are no grades here until the eighth grade. Pupils meet with their teacher every week for a personal coaching session, regular learning letters replace conventional grade reports and learning diaries help the children to understand where they currently stand and what learning goal they are aiming for next.
Although alternative valuation methods are promising, they also have their challenges. The biggest problem is that they require significantly more time. In addition, education experts agree that centralised final examinations should continue to be used at the end of the educational pathway. So far, there is no practicable solution for grade-free certificates for intermediate school-leaving certificates or A-levels. Without school grades, graduates are currently still at a disadvantage – be it with the numerus clausus or when applying for apprenticeships.
Grading and assessment, whether conventional or alternative, means a lot of work and time for teachers. Digital tools such as the Sdui Group’s learning and grade management help you to organise lessons efficiently and to track and promote pupil performance individually:
The debate about school grades clearly shows that it is not just about a number that reflects performance – it is about the way in which we assess and promote learning. Traditional grades often only provide a false sense of security and do not take into account the full range of individual learning development. Alternatives such as formative assessments or dialogue-based forms of assessment open up new ways of assessing performance in a more differentiated and fairer way. Ultimately, performance feedback and future learning planning must go hand in hand. Only when pupils are actively involved in the assessment process and do not rely solely on school grades as a benchmark can they take responsibility for their learning process – and learning becomes a genuine recognition of their individual progress.
Copyright © Sdui GmbH 2025
