The American school system is funded, operated, and evaluated based on student academic achievement data that is generated by various assessment tools and grading practices. The most traditional grading practice, norm-referenced grading, assesses student academic achievement on a 100-point scale that is further broken into categorical levels (A-F) of proficiency. With the implementation of such a grading protocol, student performance is compared to their peers rather than to a student's individualized academic growth. The purpose of this research case study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a norm-referenced grading protocol compared to a standards-based protocol. The specific variables compared between the two grading protocols serve to measure student academic achievement, teacher feedback, and Tier II learning interventions. The Tyler Theory of Curriculum Development guides the research study by addressing the foundational components (i.e., identifying objectives, selecting experiences, organizing learning, evaluating effectiveness) of the curriculum development process, specifically related to student assessment. Quantitative data was collected from a participant group of 80 high school Advanced Chemistry students, and a series of t-tests were conducted to determine if a statistically significant difference exists in students' achievement between norm-referenced and standards-based grading protocols. The research data suggests that there is no statistical difference between the protocols and, therefore, the findings were not in favor of the alternative hypothesis: a standards-based grading protocol increases student academic achievement, provides more meaningful teacher feedback, and promotes additional opportunities for students to participate in Tier II learning interventions. Given these conclusions, it is suggested that no one grading protocol can be deemed more effective than another until further research on the fundamentals of assessment and its role in curriculum development are conducted. Teachers and students must evaluate the genuine purpose of assessments, review how the data is used to drive future instruction, and seek to provide students with intentional and targeted opportunities to further their academic achievement on individualized levels. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com.bibliotheek.ehb.be/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]