posted
I had a feeling this was coming to my county. Teachers I know in other counties have recently been told to not give anything under a 50% for any work, whether they turn it in or not. Word came down from my principal this week that our county now has this grading policy as well.
I was curious what you all thought about it. My wife (also a teacher) says part of the logic behind it is so that students that get one 0 won't have to get 7 or more assignments perfect to bring it up. In a way it assumes lazy and poor teaching. That it is easier for teachers to put in a 0, then to let them make it up.
One problem I have with the policy, is that the high schools in my county do not have a similar policy. In 7th and 8th grade they get their hand held like they are still in elementary school, then freak out when they actually have to repeat a course they fail in high school.
The other issue I have is that this will encourage students that find out about it to not worry about their grades until the last couple weeks of the quarter. Especially the ones just trying to do enough to pass. It sort of punishes the ones working hard all quarter.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At first glance, my opinion is that this is a way to boost all scores without regard to student work. I don't think this has anything to do with 'lazy teachers' and much much more to do with dishonest and lazy administrators who want to show significant gains in student achievement. I really think the unintended consequence will be that many more students will no longer do tough assignments as they will always get at least 50%. Why work on a hard assignment for a possible 70% when you can watch TV and get a 50%?A policy like this would lead to teachers being able to be lazier as their overall scores should go up in the short term. I also imagine that long term adminstrators will push to lower standards to show gains as well.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the Old Days(TM), the opposite was sometimes done, where the "monkey score" (the score a monkey was likely to get) was counted as 0%. So if it was a True/False test, getting half of them right was counted as a zero. A multiple-choice test with 4 choices per question would have 25% as the new zero.
With this, it was quite possible to get a negative score.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was a fairly lazy student, from 3rd grade all the way through high school. My grades from a given class would look like:
98, 100, 0, 95, 97, 100, 96, 0, 100
With the 0's being the homework assignments I just didn't feel like doing. If the above was weighted equally, I'd get a 76% average. Most of the time tests were weighted more than homework, so I'd get something like an 85% average.
Now 85% doesn't really reflect on my intelligence very accurately, but it did reflect my level of effort. If those 0's were turned into 50's, it would have raised my GPA quite a bit. Since I didn't care much about my grades, I don't know if it would have affected me much either way.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
Now 85% doesn't really reflect on my intelligence very accurately
That is another reason some are giving. That current grades are not accurately showing what a student has actually learned in class.
If a student can do all the math that is taught to them on a test perfectly (which was my case in everything except geometry), why should they have to do homework?
I don't really know the answer to this.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did read a comment elsewhere that made a nice point.... Can I not go to work and still get 50% of my pay?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Whether they turn in it or not?
What stops a student from handing in exactly nothing and passing with a 50%?
Well, they still need a 60% to pass....technically. The truth is most of the straight E students are getting passed on to the next grade anyways. One of the reasons I'm not to upset about it here. To give an E we have to be on the ball about parent contact. So why not just give a D if they are going to be "passed" along anyways and save some time and stress.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, here is an example. The Spanish teacher was complaining that a student with a 38% was raised to a 64% when all the grades were raised to a 50%.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The policy where I am (roughly) is to give marks based on what the child does rather than what they don't do. This means that on any given report card, a child's marks are not automaton-averaged, but are ballparked based on the level at which the teacher things they are operating. For example, say out of four pieces of cumulative work for writing before a report card, the student only completes three, they do not get the average (with a max. of 75%) they get a park that reflects their competency with the material.
Incomplete work, unless it is dramatic (in which case the problem is addressed outside of the report card with the parents and the student), is shown in the teacher's comments and the "work skills" section of the report card.
In reality, most students complete most significant pieces of work. Completion of daily homework assignments wouldn't be considered as being particularly report-card worthy, and only being practice. This partially because often before middle school the reason homework is completed or not depends entirely on the parents telling the child to complete their homework.
Given that the vast majority of students up to grade 8 aren't as canny as adults who can play with the averages, I do not think this is a terrible thing. If you are disorganized but still work at a high level you get marked on your ability rather than your organization. Students who never complete homework get less practice and therefore their marks often reflect this lack of practice.
I do think that in grade 7 and 8, students should be encouraged to recognize that submission of work is now becoming part of the mark. In elementary school, provided the majority of the significant work is completed (which in my experience it is) I think that it's fair to mark students on their ability rather than their parents' ability to tell them to do their homework.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xavier: Now 85% doesn't really reflect on my intelligence very accurately, but it did reflect my level of effort.
As I see it, your grades reflect both your intelligence and your ability to do work assigned to you (aka effort). And I believe that schools should grade both on intelligence and your ability to do the work assigned.
Xavier, if they changed a 0 to a 50 for your hypothetical grades, then you would not be punished for skipping assignments (as much). This seems to encourage academically lackadaisical students.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Suppose there's a course in which lessons are cumulative, and a student received 0 for the first three quarters but gets a C in the last one -- showing that, in addition to the material introduced in the fourth quarter, he got the hang of earlier material that was necessary to understand it. Going by the numbers alone, he should fail the course, but I think it's fair to pass him.
But the situation that teachers are facing is that some students who haven't done well in the initial quarters come to realize that the math is against them and simply give up. Giving them at least 50% is a way to keep them hopeful.
Posts: 532 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: If a student can do all the math that is taught to them on a test perfectly (which was my case in everything except geometry), why should they have to do homework?
I would rather see a policy saying that a student who gets and maintains 100% on all tests in a given subject does not have to do homework than a student who does nothing gets 50%.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
If a student can do all the math that is taught to them on a test perfectly (which was my case in everything except geometry), why should they have to do homework?
I don't really know the answer to this.
My first guess is that the answer is difficult because the premise is wrong. A test is not to verify whether a student can do the work, merely to test whether a student can do the work in a test-like setting under time-pressures with no access to outside information.
Homework is about testing whether one can do the work with less time-pressure, with access to outside information, and so forth.
These are different skills.
In an ideal world, there would be nothing necessarily wrong with giving students much longer and more in-depth tests that they could take home and work on, but obviously they cannot due to cheating*, so the compromise is often the test/exam setting.
* Note that some graduate courses eventually go to take-home exams or even no exam/test with projects and assignments only
Edit to add: Ah, you guys need 60 to pass. Huh. Didn't know that.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know...I can't see how this policy would make a big difference for most students. Simply not turning in your work all semester will still get you a failing grade. 50% is not a D, it's an F. And most students don't want an F...either on one assignment or for the whole semester.
I guess a 50% may seem less scary than a 0 if a student is really struggling with an assignment and decides not to do it, but on the other hand, if a student is really struggling with one concept and can't get through it, the 50% means they still have a chance to pull through with a respectable grade...might keep them from giving up entirely.
Granted, there are probably better ways to handle situations like that, I just don't think that the 50% floor is going to affect most students' grades.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: But having no effort = 50% means that a passing grade (i.e. 60%) means you only need to know 20% of the material.
Why convolute it this way? Just grade 0% - 100% and call passing 20%.
I don't see why you're reading it that way. I'm basically reading that they grade like normal, but if you get below 50%, you get a 50%. You still need to know 60% to get a D, 70% to get a C, etc.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: But having no effort = 50% means that a passing grade (i.e. 60%) means you only need to know 20% of the material.
Why convolute it this way? Just grade 0% - 100% and call passing 20%.
I don't see why you're reading it that way. I'm basically reading that they grade like normal, but if you get below 50%, you get a 50%. You still need to know 60% to get a D, 70% to get a C, etc.
Sort of. Lets assume my student has 4 tests.
0 0 0 100
That would give that student a 25% - E/F
Under this policy it would raise those three 0s to 50
50 50 50 100
That raises the student to a 62.5% - D
They only knew 25%, but they are receiving a 62.5%.
So I see his point of view, making passing at 20% almost does the same thing in this case.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's a pretty extreme example, though. Who gets zero's on 3 tests and then suddenly pulls a perfect score? Knowing who that person is may tell us whether or not they deserve that D.
I find the situation highly unlikely. I'm willing to entertain some rationale, though.
Personally, I would prefer these things are decided on a case by case basis by a teacher with some combination of compassion and common sense, unfortunately not all teachers are that way. There are a lot of teachers who hold grudges, purposefully try to fail students, etc.
So it's important to remember that grading problems are bi-directional. There is no perfect system. I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not, but I do kind of like the idea that someone who is struggling and struggling and struggling and finally has a break through at the end still has a chance -- still has something to keep working for, even.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christine: That's a pretty extreme example, though. Who gets zero's on 3 tests and then suddenly pulls a perfect score? Knowing who that person is may tell us whether or not they deserve that D.
Like I mentioned earlier. The Spanish teacher was just forced to raise a 38% to a 64% with this new policy.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:As I see it, your grades reflect both your intelligence and your ability to do work assigned to you (aka effort). And I believe that schools should grade both on intelligence and your ability to do the work assigned.
Agreed. It'd be nice (at least for my past self) if they were two different scores presented for a better snapshot of ability, but I wouldn't expect them to bend over backwards to accommodate lazy students .
quote:Xavier, if they changed a 0 to a 50 for your hypothetical grades, then you would not be punished for skipping assignments (as much). This seems to encourage academically lackadaisical students.
I could see that being a concern. To be clear, nothing in my post was saying this change is a good or bad thing, I just was presenting how it would have affected a student like me.
I do think that a lot of those homeworks I skipped would have been a waste of my time, since my test scores clearly showed I understood the material. Should a student be punished for deciding not to waste their time? Probably not, but I can't see any way to determine this fairly, unless the teacher is willing to make case by case decisions (like Teshi mentions).
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
When my husband taught, their school had this policy. They wanted a student to feel like they could shape up and pass, even if they had made prior mistakes. If at the quarter the student has a rotten grade and the grades for the semester are averaged, the student might feel like it is impossible for them to even pull off a D in the class. At that point, there is no reason for them to keep trying and a teacher has to try to motivate a student who knows they will be retaking the class. If the student had a 50% though, a 70% is enough to pass and that the student might view as doable (and also, the parent might view it that way- if the kid has a 30% the first semester, convincing even the most hopeful parent that the kid can pull off a 90% and still pass is nearly impossible).
The grading rubric was, therefore, not there to allow student's to be laziness. It was there to help with discipline. The student always has a chance, therefore, he still has something to lose.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christine: That's a pretty extreme example, though. Who gets zero's on 3 tests and then suddenly pulls a perfect score? Knowing who that person is may tell us whether or not they deserve that D.
Like I mentioned earlier. The Spanish teacher was just forced to raise a 38% to a 64% with this new policy.
I guess I overskimmed because I missed this. That doesn't make any sense.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xavier, I know for some of my college courses, the bottom three grades (out of, say twenty assignments) were dropped. So you could read that two ways. First, a free pass to skip three assignments. Second, a good buffer for bad grades on three assignments, but no leeway in skipping assignments. I remember really liking that. I would skip an assignment or two if I were really busy, and that would not change my grade.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: The student always has a chance, therefore, he still has something to lose.
How can the student lose his chance if his grades are artificially inflated? My guess would be that the students would know they can do nothing for the first quarter, a slight amount in the second and then minimums in the rest of the year and pass. I would also guess that once the idea of giving students credit for doing nothing takes hold, the giving students tremendous created for doing even the smallest things will get out of hand.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: ... At that point, there is no reason for them to keep trying and a teacher has to try to motivate a student who knows they will be retaking the class. ...
Why would you need to motivate a student that wouldn't be in class?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scholarette is right. This is not about inflating grades. This is about motivating students.
It's game theory: Imagine there are only two tests in a class that each count half of the student's grade. If the student gets a 0% on Test 1, then even with a perfect score on Test 2, the student would still fail. Therefore, the student would have no motivation to even bother doing any work towards Test 2.
But, if the student gets a 50% on Test 1, then they could still pass the class by doing well on Test 2. Thus the student would be motivated to try harder for Test 2.
Thus this policy makes sense (although I'd think it would make even more sense just to make the grading scale 0-20%=F, 21-40%=D, etc.)
Incidently, the school system where I live just made a similar change. It used to be that three unexecused abcenses meant an automatic F for the quarter. But as a result, once someone missed three days, they had no motivation to go to school at all or study for the rest of the quarter. So, they eliminated the automatic F.
quote:If a student can do all the math that is taught to them on a test perfectly (which was my case in everything except geometry), why should they have to do homework?
Because learning math is not the only purpose of math class. Learning how to do work, plan time, study, etc. is also an important part. In fact, it's probably the more important part. I don't use geometry too often, but I go to work and organize my time every day.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: Scholarette is right. This is not about inflating grades. This is about motivating students.
It's game theory: Imagine there are only two tests in a class that each count half of the student's grade. If the student gets a 0% on Test 1, then even with a perfect score on Test 2, the student would still fail. Therefore, the student would have no motivation to even bother doing any work towards Test 2.
But, if the student gets a 50% on Test 1, then they could still pass the class by doing well on Test 2. Thus the student would be motivated to try harder for Test 2.
Thus this policy makes sense (although I'd think it would make even more sense just to make the grading scale 0-20%=F, 21-40%=D, etc.)
Incidently, the school system where I live just made a similar change. It used to be that three unexecused abcenses meant an automatic F for the quarter. But as a result, once someone missed three days, they had no motivation to go to school at all or study for the rest of the quarter. So, they eliminated the automatic F.
quote:If a student can do all the math that is taught to them on a test perfectly (which was my case in everything except geometry), why should they have to do homework?
Because learning math is not the only purpose of math class. Learning how to do work, plan time, study, etc. is also an important part. In fact, it's probably the more important part. I don't use geometry too often, but I go to work and organize my time every day.
Yes, but we are talking about elementary and middle school here. No teacher only had 2 test grades at those levels and nothing else. In fact it is a requirement in our county to have a minimum of 2 grades per week per subject. That is about 20 grades per quarter. On top of that they mandate our grading policies. For core subject areas it is generally 50% tests, 25% classwork, 25% homework. Each subject varies by 5% here or there, but that is about it. So even with just two tests, one with a 0% and one with a 100%, if they do all of their homework and classwork they can still achieve a C.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with anything other than a zero for incomplete work is that they could have actually earned a 0 or never done it or forgot it. Yes zeros are painful, but people need to get over it.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes, but we are talking about elementary and middle school here. No teacher only had 2 test grades at those levels and nothing else. In fact it is a requirement in our county to have a minimum of 2 grades per week per subject. That is about 20 grades per quarter. On top of that they mandate our grading policies. For core subject areas it is generally 50% tests, 25% classwork, 25% homework. Each subject varies by 5% here or there, but that is about it. So even with just two tests, one with a 0% and one with a 100%, if they do all of their homework and classwork they can still achieve a C.
Well, you are right there. The classwork and homework seems like it would make that kind of mandate unnecessary.
And, at least for elementary school, there's also the question of how many students even keep track of grade calculations? When I was that age, I don't ever remember trying to figure out how my grade was calculated - it just came on my report card and that was what it was.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: [QUOTE]Yes, but we are talking about elementary
And, at least for elementary school, there's also the question of how many students even keep track of grade calculations? When I was that age, I don't ever remember trying to figure out how my grade was calculated - it just came on my report card and that was what it was.
True for a lot of kids in middle school as well, unfortunately. I can't begin to tell you the blank expression I get when I try to explain how they got the average they got.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But let's say your a good, hard working student. On the first of four tests, you get decent grades (85,90,80). Another student skips the first exam, and does okay on the other two (0,80,100).
You're looking at your prospects for a final test average.
To get a ___, you need a ___ on the fourth test:
You, old system:
A, not possible B, 65 C, 25 D, not possible
You are guaranteed a C.
You, new system:
A, not possible B, 65 ------- if you get a 0, it becomes 50. C, 25 D, not possible
You are guaranteed a C, but for you, anything less than a 65 is the same as a 0.
For the other student, their prospects are (with the old system):
Them, old system:
A, not possible B, not possible C, 100 D, 60 F, anything less than 60
They are not guaranteed a passing grade.
Them, new system:
A, not possible B, 90 C, 50 D, less than 50 (not possible)
They are guaranteed a C, even if they skip this exam. So for them, a zero (i.e. no effort) guarantees them the same grade you are guaranteed, even though you have never skipped an exam.
That does not seem fair, especially from the point of view of the first student.
[ January 21, 2010, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: The White Whale ]
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: But having no effort = 50% means that a passing grade (i.e. 60%) means you only need to know 20% of the material.
Why convolute it this way? Just grade 0% - 100% and call passing 20%.
No, no. See... This goes to eleven.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
not sure about the lower grades. The way I can manage to get 50% on an assignment is if I manage to turn it in late within a week. But this is a public highschool so things aren't always fair.
these kids are in for an unpleasant awakening if their school district is similar at all
Posts: 856 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xavier, it is exactly the attitude that "this is a waste of my time, so I'm not going to do it" that I HATED as a teacher (and disagree with VERY strongly, even though (or maybe because?) I had that attitude when I was a high school student as well). And this encourages that attitude, which I think is dreadful.
My sister (who just finished her BS in bio and is going to grad school in the fall) has always been a far better student than I. I was inconsistent (very!) and often failed to do assignments. My test scores, even in a given class, were all over the place. My sister was a consistent mostly-A's-with-the-occasional-B student, and worked far harder in high school than I ever did.
But I do really well on standardized tests, and she does very poorly. So I had very high SAT scores, and hers were not that great. (I was also fortunate to be applying to colleges at a time when SAT scores were weighted much more than they are now by college admissions. I suspect that if I were to apply now with my then-GPA and the current equivalent of my SAT score, I might not get in to many of the schools that accepted me gladly in 1991.)
Being able and willing to do all the work in a class is a life skill that we should be PROMOTING, not discouraging with hair-brained schemes like this mandatory 50% nonsense.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:And most students don't want an F...either on one assignment or for the whole semester.
Heh. At my school the vast majority of my students do want Fs. An F is entertaining and gets you the respect of everyoen, and an A is "selling out" and "acting white." Which is funny, because my few, good students who do apply themselves and work hard to achieve good grades are all African-American.
At our school we don't give any quarter or semester grades less than a 50, which means even if a student earns a 35 in my class, his report grade will be 50. The rationale is that a 50 is still failing...but a kid has a chance to bring up a 50 and pass the class if he applies himself but a 35 is pretty much irrecoverable. No one wants to sentence a kid to summer school or to repeat a grade the first quarter - he will be defeated and give up.
We don't have this policy - I can still give zeros. However...my grades are inflated by the way our grading is set up. Our quarterly final exam can only be 10% of the grade. We give a "reading grade" which is 10% - this boosts a lot of grades for kids, so it's almost a free 10%.
Tests and essays are only 25% of my grade, the rest have to come from "assignments" and that is usually classwork. So 55% of your grade comes from assignments which are often done in class and I'm required to take late work for no lower than 50 percent. You have to work hard to fail my class. Some kids manage it. If they get zeros on enough assignments and fail all the tests they can fail, but that's about it. Only one student failed me for the entire first semester.
Now, ask me how many should have failed me...if I'm basing it on whether or not those students demonstrated mastery of the content I taught? I'd say more than half my students SHOULD HAVE failed but because of the way grades are structured....they got passing grades from me.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: In reality, most students complete most significant pieces of work. Completion of daily homework assignments wouldn't be considered as being particularly report-card worthy, and only being practice.
You know an image struck me just as I read this that I hadn't thought of in a long time. We used to have a science fair every year in our middle school, which basically consisted of a standardized presentation format of a big fold out cardboard poster placed on a table, organized into hypothesis, research, methods, conclusions, etc. I remember one or two people every year who would show up without a board, and try frantically in the 20 minutes before the fair to conjure into existence weeks of work the other kids had done. I have no idea how they were able to go through literally 6 weeks of classes in which the fair was the center of things, and the projects were the outcome. Yet it happened. I never saw my teachers as lazy or incompetent, but the idea that in a class of 25 people, a kid could go over a month without even starting such a project, when it was the main focus, was baffling. Looking back now, I do wonder how these kids managed to not do any of the work, when showing progress on the project had been a near daily task. Maybe some of those teachers *were* lazy or incompetent. Or maybe they had tried everything imaginable to get these kids to do the work, and nothing had worked.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At some point you have to concede that you cannot do the work for them. I have a student - call him Dave. Dave will not work. Today, for example, we are writing an in-class essay. I'm getting my students ready for a state-mandated writing assessment - so today was writing workshop day. Yesterday I assigned the topic, let them organize their thoughts, etc.
Today they were to work on their draft. They had more than 45 minutes - some students finished. Dave wrote one sentence...and that was because I stood over him and said "Write this."
I monitor his progress daily - stand over him and I've worn my fingers out trying to dial his parents' number and get in touch with them - they won't return calls. I've never spoken to them. HE.WILL.NOT.WORK. I've done all I can do...but I cannot physically force him to do it.
I had to fill out folders full of paperwork justifying why he's failing my class....and it all boils down to he won't do anything.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was once one of those kids without the science fair project until the morning of and just managing to get a D.
It was a problem at home where I knew I couldn't get started on something like that and manage to bring it in. Even with constant reminders every day about the project a kid who believes they have no chance will just sort of ignore the project.
Kids who refuse to do work or try to get A's are in my opinion a completely diccerent issue, and a much sadder one.
Posts: 856 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is a very interesting discussion. I haven't heard of entire grading systems going to the 0 = 50 method. But just today (I teach fourth grade) I explained a similar kind of grading system on a project the kids will be doing. I told them that because we are doing the work in school, and because I expected that everyone would complete the project, that they all started with 70% (69% is failing in our county). Then, to earn the points needed to make a 100, they had to include certain items in their project, meet certain requirements, etc. At the same time, they could lose points for various other things. And, if a part was missing, they would not only lose the points that they could have gained above the 70, but they would also lose points for not completing the assignment. It sounds kind of complicated as I write it out here, but it was actually quite simple and the fourth graders understood it. Theoretically, a student could work himself all the way down to a zero (by not working), or could do mediocre work and stay at the 70%, or work his or her all the way up to a 100. But this is only for this particular in-class project. Not an entire grading system.
Posts: 315 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes, but we are talking about elementary and middle school here. No teacher only had 2 test grades at those levels and nothing else. In fact it is a requirement in our county to have a minimum of 2 grades per week per subject. That is about 20 grades per quarter. On top of that they mandate our grading policies. For core subject areas it is generally 50% tests, 25% classwork, 25% homework. Each subject varies by 5% here or there, but that is about it. So even with just two tests, one with a 0% and one with a 100%, if they do all of their homework and classwork they can still achieve a C.
Well, you are right there. The classwork and homework seems like it would make that kind of mandate unnecessary.
And, at least for elementary school, there's also the question of how many students even keep track of grade calculations? When I was that age, I don't ever remember trying to figure out how my grade was calculated - it just came on my report card and that was what it was.
When I was in elementary school, we got one of three grades, an O for Outstanding, S for satisfactory, and U for unsatisfactory. While I vaguely recall getting actual letter grades and numbers on assignments, I don't remember ever being told how all those things added up to one of the three available grades. I don't remember even particularly caring about what my grades were, so long as they weren't Us, and they never were.
I started paying attention to grades in Junior High, but I didn't really CARE about them until my senior year of high school. I had a good freshman and sophomore years, and an abysmal junior year where I actually failed a semester of Chemistry, and nearly failed a semester of band on attendance. I did an about face my senior year and got a four point in every class, and did well on AP tests, but by that point, none of it really mattered so far as college applications went, I would call it all wasted effort so far as practical applications go, since none of what I did actually mattered so far as my academic future went.
In hindsight however, I realize that motivation was my biggest problem, one that followed me through my first couple years of college too. I did excellent in classes I cared about and liked, and absolutely awful in classes I didn't like. And it wasn't that I disliked them because I was bad at them, it as just boring, so I never tried (which applies to any class involving math). The only reason I got all As in Biology was by grace of an extremely brief biochemistry section.
Had we had a policy of bumping all grades to 50% at least, I probably would have done considerably better in those few classes I bombed, as only a minimum of effort would have been required to do so. And that was the only amount of effort I was willing to apply. But I don't know if that would have been a good thing or not. I think, for me, the problem was that I didn't realize how important grades would end up being for me, or I would have tried harder. By the time I did realize, the damage was already done. A grading system like this would have removed some of those negative effects, and I think in the long run would have been a net positive for me, and wouldn't have been dramatically unfair. I wasn't stupid, or unable or even unwilling to work hard. I just didn't see the point.
But applying a system like that across the board makes individual situations irrelevant. If we were going to cut kids some slack, I'd think it would have to be on an individual basis, based on what is best for them personally, not out of a scheme to inflate numbers for statisticians and number crunchers to make things LOOK better. I think there are situations where inflating someone's numbers could be done in a manner that is beneficial to the student (that is, smooths other inconsistencies without rewarding negative behaviors), but to do so en masse does not make productive sense to me.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I'm stunned by the amount of support I see for this here. In my opinion, this is a terrible idea. There's quite a few factors at play here.
1 - I really fail to see how this will motivate a failing student. A student who's going to fail on the current/old system will still have a likelihood of failing in this one. It'll just delay the inevitable. Even getting 50% scores, eventually during the course of the year a point will still be reached where getting 100% on everything would still result in an F. What will happen is teachers will be under enormous pressure in that 1-2 week period before that point is reached to make sure these students start working.
2 - I assume Stephan's example (a 38% score being recorded as a 64%) is due to grading the class on a curve. You'll wind up with students who have some motivation, but still lack the necessary knowledge passing courses. This is already a problem, from everything I've seen, but this will only heighten the pressure on high school and secondary educators who will wind up with more and more students in their classrooms lacking basic understanding of their subjects.
3 - White Whale highlighted a scenario where a student can skip an entire exam and still wind up with the same score a student who worked (hard, maybe) on all exams. While this system might motivate a student on the edge to do enough work to pass, this will undoubtedly demoralize a great deal of harder working and smarter students.
4 - DarkKnight asked "Can I not go to work and still get 50% of my pay?" But to my mind, a better question would be, at my job, can I skip 2 out of every 3 projects I'm assigned? I work for a non-typical advertising agency that focuses on speed far more than results. Most of the projects I work on, if put in a graded setting would be D's, and C's with an occasional B and extremely rare A. I'm not particularly proud of most of the work I've done, but I'm building a resume to hopefully move on to better things - but that's another post. The thing is, EVERYTHING must be completed at at least that "D" level.
Everything being equal, not all children are equal. Some are smarter than others. Some excel at math. Some excel at language. Some excel at physical activities. This is expected. School work is as much about learning how to manage and complete projects that you're not good at as much as it is about getting the best grade possible in all courses.
I'm all for socialized medicine, welfare for the poor, etc. where these things are needed by those in real need. However, handing out a free 50% of a grade score is welfare overstepping it's benefit to society. That 50% will ultimately increase the need for later welfare in life by those receiving it in their school days and increase the burden on everyone else.
In my opinion, schools right now are trying to fix a problem they can't really solve - at least not by themselves. A great teacher will never reach every child in their class with motivation problems. Gaming the numbers can't possibly. A child acquires motivation and a love of learning from the society around them, and chiefly their immediate caretakers. School plays a part, but it can't hope to fix all the problems of the rest of society around it.
Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
A couple of things complicate your view, Godric.
The first thing is that teachers don't hand back a blank piece of paper with a 50% on it to students who did not complete the assignment.
On top of that, many students in elementary school do not complete certain assignments because they are away sick. Teachers don't pile homework on these kids, they just give them a blank space. Lots of other kids have all kinds of troubles at home that make homework seem quite irrelevant. The work they complete is more instructive as to their actual abilities.
In Ontario, much of this comes from teachers not failing students. Students failing elementary school has been shown to be unmotivational and so all students move up, whether they are working at their grade level or not. Students who fall significantly behind their peer group are given special attention.
And despite the fact they always move up, all students seem to complete the majority of their work. Some students are like Belle's Dave and it's not their intelligence that's problematic but their simple refusal to work. I don't think giving students 0s will particularly do much to motivate them because they're simply not at that place in their lives yet where reality sets in.
quote:A child acquires motivation and a love of learning from the society around them, and chiefly their immediate caretakers. School plays a part, but it can't hope to fix all the problems of the rest of society around it.
To some extent, this is true. However, consider the famous 90/90/90 schools. These schools are American schools in which 90% of the students are receiving subsidized or free lunches, 90% of the students were of a visible minority and 90% were successful on standardized assessments. Link.
These schools are doing something right. They are taking these disadvantaged children and making learners out of them despite these difficulties of their society. It can be done.
Also, many students learn to learn at school, where they spend 6+ hours every day.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Godric: 2 - I assume Stephan's example (a 38% score being recorded as a 64%) is due to grading the class on a curve. You'll wind up with students who have some motivation, but still lack the necessary knowledge passing courses. This is already a problem, from everything I've seen, but this will only heighten the pressure on high school and secondary educators who will wind up with more and more students in their classrooms lacking basic understanding of their subjects.
No curve, just the Spanish teacher being forced to raise all grades a minimum 50%.
Many misinterpret what a curve is. A curve is making a bell curve out of your student's grades. The majority of students will receive Cs with a few As and Es/Fs. They ignore the stardard 90-100 being an A. If the highest grade is a 85, that person has an A. If the lowest person gets a 75, that person fails. Curves of course are absolute rubbish, that serve no purpose other than to make students compete with one another.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: On top of that, many students in elementary school do not complete certain assignments because they are away sick. Teachers don't pile homework on these kids, they just give them a blank space. Lots of other kids have all kinds of troubles at home that make homework seem quite irrelevant. The work they complete is more instructive as to their actual abilities.
In Ontario, much of this comes from teachers not failing students. Students failing elementary school has been shown to be unmotivational and so all students move up, whether they are working at their grade level or not. Students who fall significantly behind their peer group are given special attention.
I'm perfectly aware of the fact that many children have trouble at home. And I don't think they should be "punished" for that in their school setting.
But if all students move up, even if they're not working at their grade level, when do they catch up?
quote:However, consider the famous 90/90/90 schools. These schools are American schools in which 90% of the students are receiving subsidized or free lunches, 90% of the students were of a visible minority and 90% were successful on standardized assessments. Link.
These schools are doing something right. They are taking these disadvantaged children and making learners out of them despite these difficulties of their society. It can be done.
I don't discount the positive influence school can have on children. Maybe I'm somewhat biased living in Nevada, one of the worst ranking school systems in the USA. I don't think schools alone can fix many of the issues facing children's ability to grow and learn. And I think it's stupid to put that responsibility squarely on their shoulders. My boss's wife is an administrator for the Clark county (Las Vegas) school district so I hear lot of stories from her as well as the local NPR station and it's clear they're fighting a losing battle in many of their school districts.
I just can't see how a policy like this would help in any way.
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: No curve, just the Spanish teacher being forced to raise all grades a minimum 50%.
So why did the student get a 64%? Why wouldn't it just be raised to 50%? In my mind there's a big difference between raising a grade that is below 50% to 50% (which is still an F) and raising it to a 64%, which would be a passing grade (D).
Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
