Are Grades Lying to Us? The Case for Mastery Learning

(For a video of this article, click on this link.)

Why is education so resistant to change? Even with the best intentions, most reforms fail to reach the classroom. Here is what the research says about a better path: Mastery Learning.

The Inertia of Education

Education is a foundational field, yet non-experts often overlook it. Some mistakenly assume that teaching is just “explaining something,” while others even deny its existence as a specialized discipline by assuming that schools simply need to hire content experts with no background or aptitude for instruction. The sad truth is that many do not acknowledge both the science and the art behind high-tier instruction.

Coupled with this is the fact that society feels a high degree of ownership over the field due to their own past experience in it. After all, not everyone has had surgery, participated in a legal trial, or run a large business; yet nearly everyone in America has been exposed to education in one way or another. Because of this, there is a high degree of pressure placed on our public schools that no other field experiences.

Yet for all of the outside influence that public educators and students experience, including the countless reform efforts looking to redefine educational practices, the field itself is surprisingly resistant to change. As Zimmerman (2006) notes, “Education is a field characterized by high levels of institutional inertia. Changes in educational practice are often slow to occur, and even when new ideas are introduced, they are frequently adapted to fit existing structures rather than transforming them” (p. 94).

This is largely because teaching is “loosely coupled,” meaning that grand ideas written at the national, state, or even district level very rarely trickle down to the classroom level to create any kind of meaningful change (Weick, 1976). Although many classroom teachers would argue that this is necessary for survival, there is a nearly universal perception that those creating these plans and initiatives — lawmakers, education advocates, business lobbyists, and even district administrators — are too far removed from the classrooms to truly understand what students need.

Consequently, even the most well-intentioned initiatives can often feel like just another “to-do” on a seemingly endless list. Teachers often perceive these mandates as being unaware of the day-to-day logistics of classroom instruction. This disconnect between policy and practice often prevents systemic improvement from taking root.

Enter Mastery Learning: The Shift from Compliance to Mastery

This is where mastery learning comes into play. This pedagogical approach is built on the core premise that the goal is for all students to master the course material regardless of when they do so (Winget & Persky, 2022, p. ajpe8906). It shifts the focus from a fixed calendar to a fixed outcome of proficiency.

Key characteristics of this approach include benchmarking units so that students must demonstrate proficiency with a specific set of skills before advancing to the next unit (Alvarez et al., 2023). This ensures that the foundation of learning is solid before more complex concepts are introduced.

Additionally, teachers must regularly use formative assessments to identify student learning gaps. This allows for providing regular feedback and re-teaching to students based on their respective performance (Clapham, 2023). In this model, assessment is a diagnostic tool rather than a final judgment.

Mastery learning also involves providing opportunities for students who do not meet mastery to receive additional intervention and make corrections. Simultaneously, those students who do meet mastery have opportunities for enrichment (Winget & Persky, 2022). This ensures that no student is left behind or held back once they have proven their competence.

These practices are not just student-centered; they are supported by a wealth of research. Modern research confirms that when instruction is decoupled from rigid timelines and behavioral compliance, over 90% of students achieve high-level proficiency while experiencing increased engagement and significantly narrowed equity gaps (Guskey & Anderman, 2024; New England College, 2025; Winget & Persky, 2022). The simplest explanation for this is that mastery learning reframes education to focus on learning as opposed to other extraneous factors that bear no real relevance to student success.

Next Steps to Achieving Student Learning

So where does this leave educators? After all, could this shift to mastery learning serve as yet another item on a seemingly endless to-do list? Fortunately, this shift is not as dramatic as most think, and many educators are already implementing mastery learning techniques without always realizing it.

At the foundational level, implementing mastery learning simply means shifting the educator’s mindset from grading for compliance to grading for learning. It also means being deliberate to ensure that students’ grades reflect their actual competence. By doing so, we provide students with a clear and honest map of their educational journey.

References

Alvarez, C., Samary, M. M., & Wise, A. F. (2023). Modularization for mastery learning in CS1: A 4-year action research study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36, 546–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09366-1

Clapham, A. (2023). Examining teaching for mastery as an instance of ‘hyperreal’ cross national policy borrowing. Oxford Review of Education, 50(3), 366–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2229549

Popham, W. J. (2017). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (8th ed.). Pearson.

Guskey, T. R., & Anderman, E. M. (2024). Principles of effective mastery learning for the modern classroom. [Synthesis of current research].

New England College. (2025). Teaching all students: The use of self-paced, mastery-based, blended learning to reach all learners. New England College Journal of Applied Educational Research, 5(1), 1–12.

Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391875

Winget, M., & Persky, A. M. (2022). A practical review of mastery learning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 86(8), ajpe8906. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8906

Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and others embrace it. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 21(2), 94–112.