Grading in physical education: part 1
There has been a lot of talk about grading in physical education lately — and a lot of mistakes. My grade comes together from three observations: the age-appropriate average, individual development and real effort. No single one works on its own; together, they work quite well.
You can’t give up on grading
Let’s say it up front: grading is necessary. Otherwise, a process we call development can’t be steered — and schooling is a process. Every positive trend needs a mirror to measure itself against. Anyone who claims otherwise cannot grasp learning, teaching or human psychology in any depth.
So the question is not whether to grade, but how. Assessing someone or something is not easy, and it can rarely be done on a single criterion. It would be unfair to go only by the age-appropriate average and set aside a student’s diligence and progress. We go just as wrong if we see only subjective development and ignore ability and effort. The balance between these is what this whole discussion is about.
Grading from three angles
My summative grade — at the end of a trimester or school year — consists of three components:
- Objectivity — the age-appropriate average and the class level. Does the student reach the minimum required in compulsory school? Does their skill set match their age?
- Subjectivity — individual ability, development and progress. Where were they in the autumn, and where are they in the spring?
- Activity — diligence, effort, willingness to get things done. How much they give, not just how much they can do.
All three must be present. If I take only the first, I push aside the child who started from zero and, through hard work, reached a satisfactory level — that would be unfair. If I take only the second, I let the stronger half of the class slide into comfort, because “well, they’re moving somehow.” If I take only the third, I grade willingness, not results — and the student reaches upper secondary school without elementary skills. Grading can’t be a linear calculation; it is always a triangle.
Grading against the age-appropriate average
Age-appropriate ability matters more than it seems at first glance. Why are children arranged into classes by age at all? Precisely because, for a great many activities, an even level within the group is an important condition — learning together, playing together and developing together all assume that everyone is at roughly the same place.
But that evenness is disappearing. Increasingly often, the range of levels within a single class is so wide that putting 2nd- and 4th-grade boys together in a PE lesson would make more sense than some same-age groups. One student can manage only simple movement games; another child in the same class could already be training with the county youth team.
In such conditions, the weaker student finds it too hard and the stronger one finds it too easy — and is constantly bored. For both, it ends in passivity and a lack of motivation. Problems of exclusion arise. This is exactly where the argument comes from for why the curriculum sets a minimum required age-appropriate competence — what in practice corresponds to a grade of “3”. We aren’t talking about elite sport, but about the ABC: activities that come naturally to humans and that people have managed in every era. True, in today’s sedentary age many people have to practice even to reach that — which goes without saying.
If the forearm pass, overhead pass and serving aren’t at a satisfactory individual level in volleyball, it’s pointless to try to get the group to play together. The same applies to almost all collective activities — and there are many of them in sport and physical education.
Individuality is no excuse for doing nothing
When a small tree starts to grow, the sapling first sends up a straight trunk, with no branches. Only once the trunk is strong enough does the tree begin to branch. It is the same with a developing person.
Lasting values, primary skills and the most elementary competences are so universal at the start that there is no need to hurry with concessions. Specialization comes later. Crawling, sitting, walking, reading, writing — we all learn them within roughly the same timeframe. The same holds for compulsory school skills. In today’s age, which strongly emphasizes subjectivity, these timeframes have somehow stretched unjustifiably wide.
The most worrying tendency: simple whim, not bothering and failure stemming from superficial interest are automatically equated with individual peculiarity. Many simply can’t be bothered to dig in, nothing comes of it — and the excuses come quickly: “they’re just not that type,” “they have no feel for languages,” “it’s not their thing.” Explaining every small difference by a lack of talent — especially if we keep repeating it to the child — kills enthusiasm and diligence.
If I’m constantly told that I have no feel for languages, the point of trying anything in English disappears — I won’t get anywhere anyway. It’s the same in physical education. The concept of individuality has been abused and understood backwards. In reality, it’s the other way around: individuality is no excuse for doing nothing; it obliges us to put in extra work.
Any sporting or health-promoting activity means stepping out of your comfort zone. Being out of breath and feeling the strain while running is normal, even necessary — not unpleasant. There is no other way to secure your health. This is the exact opposite of today’s “everything has to be fun” approach to raising children, but it is true.
Grading in practice: what the teacher weighs
In practice, grading is on the teacher’s mind throughout the whole trimester, not just on assessment day. Notes, interim tests, running times, the technical precision of repeated exercises — it all builds into one picture. The more data points, the fairer the grade.
When there is no criterion — when no time standard, rep count or technical requirement forces me — there is no motivation to push beyond myself. Why bother? I can do as much as I like, and “I’m doing well anyway.” Yet the 500 m time on sports day keeps moving steadily in the same direction every year — and that pattern shows where we end up when we don’t set expectations at all.
The pressure that comes from grading must therefore be realistic, but not nonexistent. The average student does not have well-developed willpower or health awareness. If the grading policy leaves a back door open to laziness from the start, that door will get used. Anything that feels hard or uncomfortable will soon start to feel tedious and pointless — that is a natural human reaction, especially in a young person whose willpower is still developing.
Comfort, however, is a two-edged sword. 200 grams of chocolate every evening and a sedentary lifestyle feel pleasant in the moment; do that for 10–20 years and see where your health has ended up. Do this physical activity that feels hard 2–3 times a week — and you get stronger health, a better quality of life and, most likely, a longer lifespan in return. A young person can’t yet see all that in perspective; sometimes they need a push from behind.
FAQ
Can an age-appropriate average be applied at all today, when class levels differ so much?
Yes, but the average must not be the only yardstick. The curriculum sets a minimum that students must not fall below — that remains in force. Above that, we grade individual progress and effort.
How do you tell a child’s genuine individual trait from laziness?
A trait shows up consistently: the child tries but struggles with a specific technical element. Laziness shows up as a pattern — the child doesn’t try because there is “no point.” If I see consistent effort without results, it is an individual particularity; if I see systematic avoidance of effort, it is a matter of will.
What do you say to a parent whose child gets a “3” despite their “individual style”?
That a “3” is not a punishment — it confirms the minimum standard. Beyond that, there is room to talk about how to develop individual strengths further. But the minimum remains the minimum, because it protects the child from later shortcomings.
To be continued…
Author: Janar Rückenberg
Come and train! ArtGym
