Summary Teacher Grading Guide
| Site: | Calvary Preparatory Academy |
| Course: | New Curriculum Model Overview |
| Book: | Summary Teacher Grading Guide |
| Printed by: | Guest user |
| Date: | Friday, July 17, 2026, 4:12 PM |
1. CPA Holistic Grading Model
Calvary Preparatory Academy — Teacher Guide
Holistic Grading Model — Summary Reference
Page 1 of 5
Model Overview & Quick Reference
CPA Holistic Grading Model
Teacher Guide — Summary Reference
This guide is your working reference for the holistic grading model. It covers what to enter, when to enter it, how to score each category, and what your professional judgment is expected to do. For full policy detail see the Administrative Policy Document. For student-facing explanations see the Student Orientation.
The six categories at a glance
| Category | Tier | Weight | Where entered | Your input |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Curriculum Grade | Class | 40% | Course tab B2 | Edmentum/Apex grade as decimal (0.78 = 78%) |
| Meeting Content — Learning Verification | Class | 30% | Course tab cols C–F per section | 4 component scores: C(0–10), D(0–4), E(0–4), F(0–2) |
| Assigned Work Completion | Class | 10% | Course tab col B per section | 0–10 per section |
| Meeting Attendance | Holistic | 10% | CourseGrades tab col C | 0–10 per section (attend + punct + prep) |
| Regular Engagement | Holistic | 5% | CourseGrades tab col D | 0–5 per section |
| Faith-Based Community Values in Action (Faith-in-Action) | Holistic | 5% | CourseGrades tab col B | Credit per section (0, 50%, or 100%) |
| Total | 100% |
Spreadsheet quick reference
CourseGrades tab — holistic tier (enter once, applies to all courses)
Course tabs — class-specific tier (one tab per enrolled course)
Critical data entry rule
Zero vs. blank: A zero means the student was assessed and earned nothing — it is included in the average. A blank means the section was not applicable or not yet scored — it is excluded. Never leave a cell blank to indicate a zero.
Grade formula
The overall grade for each course = weighted sum of all six categories. The holistic tier scores from CourseGrades feed automatically into every course tab. The formula gates on B2 — if no curriculum grade is entered, the overall grade shows No Grade.
Blank sections are excluded from category averages (AVERAGEIF pattern with ISNUMBER). Zeros are included. This means entering grades for 5 of 18 sections produces a correct partial-semester average — not a deflated full-semester average.
2. Holistic Tier Scoring Guide
Calvary Preparatory Academy — Teacher Guide
Holistic Grading Model — Summary Reference
Page 2 of 5
Holistic Tier — Scoring Guide
Holistic Tier Scoring Guide
Meeting Attendance • Regular Engagement • Faith-in-Action
Meeting Attendance — 10% — CourseGrades col C — 0 to 10 per section
Meeting Attendance
Three components. Enter the total (sum of all three) in CourseGrades col C. Document any discretionary decisions in col E (Notes).
Documentation required for discretionary scores
Document any makeup meeting point restorations in col E. Document any discretionary punctuality adjustments in col E. These notes protect you in any appeals.
Regular Engagement — 5% — CourseGrades col D — 0 to 5 per section
Regular Engagement
Assess both DDF participation and digital textbook login frequency for full-time students. DDF is required daily. Missing posts may reduce the score even with strong textbook activity. For part-time students, assess textbook logins primarily.
| Score | Regular semester indicators | Summer school indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 5/5 | Strong DDF + textbook logins across multiple days. Both venues active throughout the week. | DDF 100% required. Strong daily posts + textbook activity. Primary measure is DDF. |
| 3–4/5 | Moderate. Present most days but not fully consistent in one or both venues. | Moderate DDF. Some days missed. Award 4 for mostly present, 3 for partial. |
| 1–2/5 | Minimal. Work concentrated in one or two sessions. Sparse DDF. | Sparse DDF. Little evidence of daily presence. |
| 0/5 | No recorded activity in either venue for the section. | No DDF posts for the section. |
Part-time policy
Part-time students: textbook logins are the primary measure. Voluntary DDF by a part-time student may raise a weak textbook score by up to 1 point at your discretion — recovery only, not a bonus.
Faith-in-Action — 5% — CourseGrades col B — credit per section
Faith-Based Community Values in Action (Faith-in-Action)
Students select one of ten ESLRs faith-in-action standards in their pre-meeting reflection and describe specifically how they practiced it. You assess genuineness and specificity.
| Credit | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 100% | Reflection submitted. Standard selected. Specific genuine description of how it was practiced. One concrete growth step identified for next section. |
| 50% | Reflection submitted. Something genuine attempted but vague, generic, or missing the growth step. Teacher discretion applies. |
| 0% | Not submitted. Or submitted but faith-in-action section empty or clearly hollow. |
- Qualifying venues: DDF engagement, prayer forum, club participation, service activities, acts of encouragement
- Non-Christian students are fully eligible — genuine character and community values in practice earn full credit
- Repeated hollow submissions (3+ in a semester): document and notify parent
- Document any partial credit decisions in Notes
3. Learning Verification Scoring Guide
Calvary Preparatory Academy — Teacher Guide
Holistic Grading Model — Summary Reference
Page 3 of 5
Class-Specific Tier — Learning Verification
Learning Verification Scoring Guide
Meeting Content — 30% — Cols C through F — scored out of 20 per section
Before you begin
This is the most important category in the model. Read the student's pre-meeting reflection before the session starts. Use it to triage which subjects need the most time. Score all four components at the end of each section's presentation.
Component 1 — Depth of Understanding
Col C — 0 to 10 — 50% of category
Can the student explain concepts accurately in their own words? Can they go beyond surface recall and make real connections?
| Score | Level | Observable indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 9–10 | Thorough command | Explains clearly in own words. Connects ideas. Makes real-world connections. Goes beyond what was minimally required. |
| 7–8 | Solid understanding | Understands core concepts well. Can apply when prompted. Minor gaps. |
| 4–6 | Surface understanding | Aware of topic but shallow. Heavy reliance on reading from submitted work. |
| 1–3 | Minimal understanding | Struggles to explain even with prompting. Work submitted but learning not evident. |
| 0 | No understanding | Cannot explain the material at all. Teacher cannot verify any learning occurred. |
Subject-specific prompts
| Subject | Depth questions to ask |
|---|---|
| History | Why did this event happen? What were the long-term effects? How does it connect to something happening today? |
| English | What is the author trying to say? What does this character want, and why does that matter? What would you change about your own paper? |
| Math | Explain this concept in your own words. Now solve this problem — walk me through your thinking. |
| Science | What did the lab show? Why does this happen? Where do we see this in the real world? |
| Foreign Language | Translate this sentence. Conjugate this verb. Tell me about your week using vocabulary from this unit. |
| Bible | What did you study this section? How does it connect to your life right now? What question did it raise for you? |
Component 2 — Responsiveness to Questioning
Col D — 0 to 4 — 20% of category
How does the student handle questions they did not prepare for? Can they think in real time?
| Score | Level | Observable indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Highly responsive | Handles unexpected questions confidently. Genuine reasoning — not rehearsed recall. |
| 3 | Adequately responsive | Answers most questions with some prompting. Recovers from hesitation. |
| 2 | Partially responsive | Handles prepared questions but struggles with anything unexpected. |
| 1 | Minimally responsive | Cannot engage meaningfully beyond prepared material. |
| 0 | Non-responsive | Unable or unwilling to engage with any teacher questioning. |
Component 3 — Growth Awareness & Ownership
Col E — 0 to 4 — 20% of category
Does the student know where they stand? Can they identify gaps and describe a specific improvement plan?
| Score | Level | Observable indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Strong ownership | Accurately identifies strengths and gaps. Has a specific, actionable plan. May reference prior sections to show growth. |
| 3 | Developing ownership | Some self-awareness. Can identify areas for improvement when prompted. Plan is vague. |
| 2 | Limited ownership | Little awareness of gaps. No meaningful improvement plan offered. |
| 0–1 | No ownership | Entirely passive. No self-reflection offered. |
Component 4 — Teacher Conviction & Discontinuity Flag
Col F — 0 to 2 — 10% of category
After the meeting: does the overall picture cohere? Does the meeting performance match the curriculum grade?
| Score | Level | Teacher assessment |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Fully convinced | Meeting performance consistent with or exceeds curriculum grade. No reason to question authenticity. |
| 1 | Partially convinced | Some consistency but notable gaps. Mild questions about depth of independent learning. |
| 0 | Discontinuity flag | Significant gap between curriculum grade and meeting performance. Student cannot explain or defend work they supposedly completed. |
Discontinuity flag protocol
When you award 0 for Teacher Conviction: (1) Document the specific discrepancy in col H Notes — what could the student demonstrate and what could they not. (2) Follow up through normal professional and administrative channels. (3) A second discontinuity flag in the same course in the same semester should trigger administrative review.
Score reference
20
100% — A+
18
90% — A−
17
85% — B
16
80% — B−
14
70% — C
12
60% — D
<12
<60% — F
The portfolio approach
Students may present work from any prior section during any meeting. This earns meeting content points for the section being defended, not the section in which the work was originally assigned. Students who are behind can still earn meaningful LV points by defending whatever they have completed.
4. Curriculum Grade, Assigned Work, and Running the Meeting
Calvary Preparatory Academy — Teacher Guide
Holistic Grading Model — Summary Reference
Page 4 of 5
Curriculum Grade • Assigned Work • Meeting Flow
Curriculum Grade, Assigned Work, and Running the Meeting
Curriculum Grade — 40% — Course tab B2
Curriculum Grade
Enter the Edmentum/Apex digital textbook grade as a decimal in cell B2 of each course tab. This is the authoritative textbook grade as displayed — no adjustment at the spreadsheet level.
- Example: 78% → enter 0.78
- Missing or late work is enforced by entering zeros directly in Edmentum, which naturally lowers this grade
- The overall course grade formula gates on B2 — if B2 is blank, the spreadsheet shows No Grade
- Update B2 each time the textbook grade changes
Assigned Work Completion — 10% — Course tab col B per section
Assigned Work Completion
A single 0–10 score per section based on completion status of assigned work. This category measures completion only — quality is assessed in the Learning Verification meeting.
| Score | Status | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | Complete | All assigned work submitted and ready to present at meeting time |
| 7–9 | Mostly complete | Most work submitted; one or two items outstanding |
| 4–6 | Mostly incomplete | Meaningful portion not submitted; meeting productivity limited |
| 0–3 | Missing | Little to no work submitted by appointment time |
- All work is due at appointment time — whether or not the meeting is rescheduled or missed
- Student self-reports completion in the pre-meeting reflection — cross-reference against actual submissions
- Do not penalize here for quality — that is the LV category's job
Running an efficient meeting
A one-hour meeting with a well-prepared student covering multiple courses is achievable with the right structure. Here is a realistic time allocation:
| Phase | Minutes | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-meeting (teacher only) | ~5 | Read the student's end-of-section reflections. Note discrepancies worth probing. Pull up gradebook. This is the highest-leverage 5 minutes you invest. |
| Opening — holistic tier observation | ~3 | Student joins. Punctuality and preparation observable immediately. Enter meeting attendance (10 pts) based on what you see in the first 60 seconds. |
| Per-course learning verification | ~7 per course | Present → 2–3 targeted questions → growth question → enter 4 scores (C, D, E, F). At 7 min/course, 6 courses = 42 minutes. |
| Curriculum + assigned work entry | ~3 total | Enter B2 and col B for each course. 30 sec per course. |
| Closing | ~3–5 | Observations, encouragement, next-section focus areas. |
| Total | ~58–62 min |
Pre-meeting read is essential
The pre-meeting reflection read is not optional — it converts the meeting from discovery to verification and is the single biggest efficiency multiplier available to you. A teacher who reads the reflection before the meeting starts is significantly more effective than one who discovers everything live.
Realistic per-course meeting flow (7 minutes)
| Minute | What you do |
|---|---|
| 0:00–1:00 | Student walks you through what they prepared — briefly. Let them lead. |
| 1:00–4:00 | Ask 2–3 targeted questions. Probe one follow-up. Listen for depth vs. surface understanding. |
| 4:00–6:00 | Growth question: "What was hardest? What is your plan?" Listen for ownership. |
| 6:00–7:00 | Enter scores: C (0–10), D (0–4), E (0–4), F (0–2). 30 seconds. |
A student who is strong across all courses can move through some in 4–5 minutes. A student who is struggling in one subject gets more time there — the pre-meeting reflection tells you in advance where to allocate.
5. Summer School, Edge Cases, and Policy Reference
Calvary Preparatory Academy — Teacher Guide
Holistic Grading Model — Summary Reference
Page 5 of 5
Summer School • Edge Cases • Policy Reference
Summer School, Edge Cases, and Policy Reference
Summer school differences
Summer school uses the same grading model and standard weights. The differences are operational:
| Factor | Regular semester | Summer school |
|---|---|---|
| Pacing | 1 section/week | ~5 sections/week (compressed into ~3.5–4 weeks) |
| Holistic score entry | Once per week per section | Still once per section — but sections come faster |
| DDF requirement | Required daily; 5 day/week | 100% required every school day; primary engagement measure |
| DDF absence policy | Handled through rubric score | Rubric handles absences 1–2; administrative deduction begins at absence 3 |
| Student type | Full-time or part-time | All summer students are full-time by definition |
Summer DDF administrative deduction — your role
- Track DDF posts daily in your course notes or a separate log
- Enter Regular Engagement score in CourseGrades normally — this is separate from the deduction
- When a student reaches their 3rd DDF absence: notify administration
- Administration applies the grade deduction to the student's record
- You do not enter the deduction in the spreadsheet — it is applied administratively
- Parent notification is issued when the deduction is first triggered
| Absence | 1-course deduction | 2-course deduction | 3-course deduction |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st & 2nd | Rubric only | Rubric only | Rubric only |
| 3rd | −3% off overall grade | −2% per course | −1% per course |
| 4th | −6% cumulative | −4% cumulative | −2% cumulative |
Edge cases and resolutions
| Situation | Resolution |
|---|---|
| Student misses meeting due to verified technology failure | Reschedule at no penalty regardless of semester reschedule count. Document in Notes. |
| Student arrives to meeting partially prepared | Score preparation component honestly (1–3). Enter as scored — do not leave blank. |
| Student wants to present work from a prior section | Award LV points for the section being defended. Document which prior section work was presented in Notes. |
| Curriculum grade not yet available | Leave B2 blank — spreadsheet shows No Grade. Enter as soon as available. |
| Student has submitted hollow Faith-in-Action reflections repeatedly | Award 0 each time after warning. Document. Notify parent at the 3rd instance. |
| Technology failure mid-meeting | Score what was completed. Document the interruption. Teacher discretion on partial credit for incomplete components. |
| Part-time student posts voluntarily in DDF | May raise a weak textbook engagement score by up to 1 point. Recovery only — not a bonus for already-strong engagement. |
| Student withdraws mid-semester | Leave gradebook as-is. Final grade = whatever the formula produces from entered data. No retroactive adjustments. |
Key policy positions — quick reference
Grading scale reference
| Grade | Range | Grade | Range |
|---|---|---|---|
| A+ | 99–100% | C+ | 79% |
| A | 91–98% | C | 71–78% |
| A− | 90% | C− | 70% |
| B+ | 89% | D+ | 69% |
| B | 81–88% | D | 61–68% |
| B− | 80% | D− | 60% |
| F = 0–59% |