Washington Post wrote that,
in Maryland, “Prince George’s County is weighing in changes that would soften
its stance towards late work and bar teachers from giving students zeroes for
assignments.” https://www.washingtonpost. com/local/education/is-it- becoming-too-hard-to-fail- schools-are-shifting-toward- no-zero-grading-policies/2016/ 07/05/3c464f5e-3cb0-11e6-80bc- d06711fd2125_story.html
As Washington Post reported, “The county has long
languished as one of the worst-performing school districts in the state, but it
has seen modest improvement in a number of academic measures in recent years.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/high-school-graduation-rates-fall-in-prince-georges-county-but-improve-statewide/2013/10/30/0fb73298-417f-11e3-a751-f032898f2dbc_story.html
Progressive are now
wrestling with the idea of socially-engineering school grades to help with the
social promotion of more students because academics, in their finite wisdom,
cannot decide if grades should show:
1.
Punishment
2.
Motivation
3.
Representation of
what a student has learned or not learned in class.
In Virginia’s Fairfax
County Schools, one of the largest school systems in our nation, a new policy dictates
that no middle and high school students can earn a lower score of 50 if “they
make a reasonable attempt to complete work.” The problem is, who decides what is
‘reasonable attempt,’ what is the exact definition, and how will it be
measured.
How subjective will this
evaluation be and what do the rest of the students think who have actually done
their work on time and how does it devalue their efforts? In the end, why try
at all if failing students will be passed anyway?
High school teachers, who
were going to fail a student, had to reevaluate the grade by using “quality
points,” changing an F into something else, less damaging to the student. In
other words, let’s give Johnny an award for just walking across the stage
without tripping too many times.
In Prince George’s County
in Maryland, administrators are limiting failing grades to 50 percent minimum
when the student shows a “good-faith effort,” another subjective evaluation.
What is “good faith?”
Educators who have
contributed continuously to the demise of our education system believe that
rewarding failure actually helps students climb out of mathematical doom and
prevent them from dropping out before graduation. What is the point of graduating
someone who has learned precious nothing, can barely read or write, but was
socially promoted?
Good teachers know that
grades can be a wonderful tool to motivate a student to try harder, to be more diligent,
and thus prepare them for college and work. Hiding failure by boosting unearned
grades is a disservice to students who do not have basic subject matter
knowledge to succeed later on in life or in college and a disservice to the
other students who actually work hard to earn their grades and might eventually
put forth less effort themselves.
The leftist academics
argue that “not everyone learns the same way or at the same pace,” which is
true, however, let’s not mix ‘how one learns’ with ‘completing assignments on
time’ and ‘performing well or poorly on tests.’
Michael Petrilli,
president of the Fordham Institute, said, “It reflects the soft bigotry of low
expectations around student effort and student behavior.” Students learn fast
that “hard work and homework are not important.” He continues, “Is it because
we think certain groups of kids aren’t capable of them?”
Rick Wormeli said that
test retakes and changing the grading system are being considered at more than
half of U.S. schools. Some educators believe that “a score of zero is
mathematically unjust.”
Gregory Hood, principal of
James Madison High School in Fairfax County said, “A zero provides no
information about what a student has learned, and it negatively impacts a
student’s grade when averaged with other grades.”
I would like to elucidate
his quandary, it’s quite simple to understand – the student has learned nothing
in that assignment therefore his knowledge is worth zero. And yes, a zero on an
assignment does change a student’s overall grade, and it should, it does not “distort”
a student’s grade, it merely reflects the lack of effort and of learning. Furthermore,
one poor grade is not impossible to overcome.
Some schools base grading
on standards, on what students actually learn, not on work habits, student
effort, punctuality, or homework. Fairfax County permits students to turn in
work late, retake major exams if the score is below 80, and homework can only
count 10 percent of a student’s grade.
In other counties behavior and attendance are not factors in grades.
Some college classes
require attendance and a certain number of absences will severely affect a
student’s grade. Why would you pay so much tuition to learn and then skip
classes? On the other hand, if you have a progressive teacher who brings
his/her ideology and political affiliation to class and punishes students who
dare to show their divergent views and beliefs, why come to class to be subjected
to harassment every time?
Ultimately lazy students
will learn to “game the system” and manage to pass without much effort.
As a former teacher, I
believe that grades should reflect a student’s work ethic, habits, preparation
for class, oral participation in class, and turning in work on time because
meeting deadlines and a good work ethic, whether academic or not are part of
the fabric of a future adult in the real world who must be accountable for
their actions. There are not many re-dos for botched jobs that cost lives and
money in the real world. An incompetent person is usually fired.
Thomas R. Guskey, Professor
of Education, suggested a new grading system. One grade should be for ‘content
mastery’ and another grade for ‘process criteria,’ such as student
collaboration, participation in class discussion, turning work on time, etc.
I would like to be treated
by a doctor who excelled at ‘content mastery’ and skill rather than
collaboration or participation in classroom discussion that is many times
counterproductive to learning when students stray from the topic at hand
because they want to kill time before the bell rings.
Theresa Mitchell Dudley,
president of Prince George’s County Educators’ Association, is quoted as
saying, “We have no problem being fair to students. But if they are not doing
the work and not performing, and we give them a grade they did not earn, how
does that make them college and career ready?”
Let’s make the grades soar
through these half-baked ideas, while the students’ actual achievement will
plummet and schools will become even more mediocre than they really are.
Do we want EMTs and police
to arrive late because that’s the work ethic they learned in school? Do we redo
a collapsed bridge built by people who failed at simple mathematical
calculations and measured something incorrectly or made a mixture of concrete
too brittle?
Ultimately, this new grading
policy trend is intended to further erode society by teaching students to avoid
accountability, which is now an
endemic problem in our country, and to promote mediocrity, negligence, and indolence.
Maybe the FBI's Comey can make the judgment calls, regarding a student's good faith effort with his/her studying and test taking.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the FBI's Comey can make the judgment calls, regarding a student's good faith effort with his/her studying and test taking.
ReplyDelete