Should Participation and Attendance Count Toward a Student’s Final Grade?

Beginning in the 2026–2027 school year, Ontario introduced a significant change to the way secondary school students are evaluated. Attendance and participation now account for 15% of the final mark in Grades 9 and 10 and 10% in Grades 11 and 12.

As an educator, I believe there are good reasons behind this decision, but I also believe it raises some important questions about fairness.

Attendance matters. Students need to be present and engaged with their education. Over the years, educators have seen the consequences when students regularly miss classes or become disconnected from school. Giving attendance some value may encourage students to develop responsibility, consistency, and better learning habits.

Participation, however, is more complicated.

Not every student participates in the same way. A confident student with a strong academic background may be comfortable raising a hand, answering questions, joining discussions, and expressing an opinion in front of the class. For that student, earning a strong participation mark may come naturally.

But what about a student with anxiety? What about a student with ADHD, a learning disability, depression, or another difficulty that affects classroom participation?

We should also consider newcomers and English language learners. A student may understand the lesson very well but hesitate to participate because they are still developing confidence in speaking English. Even a naturally shy student may have excellent knowledge of the subject while feeling uncomfortable speaking in front of classmates.

Should these students receive a lower final course mark because they participate differently?

This is where implementation becomes very important. Participation should not simply mean “who speaks the most.” A quiet student who listens carefully, completes activities, asks questions privately, works respectfully with classmates, or contributes through written or online activities may be participating just as meaningfully as the student who regularly speaks during class discussions.

There are also positive possibilities in this policy. If implemented fairly, it may encourage students to become more involved in their education rather than simply completing assignments and writing exams. It may help teachers build more active classrooms and encourage students to develop communication, responsibility, collaboration, and confidence.

The challenge will be making sure that participation marks do not unintentionally reward personality, confidence, language ability, or disability rather than genuine engagement with learning.

Ontario schools already have responsibilities to support students with different learning needs. The new policy makes that responsibility even more important. Teachers and schools will need to recognize that meaningful participation can look very different from one student to another.

I support the idea that students should attend school and engage in their education. At the same time, I think we need to be careful about how we define and measure participation when it becomes part of an academic grade.

Perhaps the real question is not whether participation matters. Of course it does.

The question is: How can we measure participation fairly without disadvantaging the very students who may need our encouragement and support the most?