Baltimore to ban grades lower than 50%?

[mijopaalmc]

My first post in this thread was a response to the assertion that 50% would become the new 0%. This is mathematically untrue since the grading scheme described in the original post apparently only sets the floor at 50% and doesn't rescale the other grade categories. From a mathematical standpoint, this is fair to all students in the sense that all students have the same 50% floor for all their grades.

However, if one chooses to use grades as a way of evaluating the student on other things then the performance on the course material, the situation becomes more complex, because the system only evaluates the student based upon how the student on factors internal to the course material, such as how much of the assignment course material the student completed and the quality of the completed work. The method of evaluation most often does not include assessment of the student's motivation in completing the assignment. It doesn't matter weather the assignment was only 20% complete or that only 20% of the assignment was correct, the student still gets a 20% on the assignment. Moreover, it doesn't matter if the student didn't care to complete the assignment or failed to complete it for reasons beyond their control. psionl0 seems to be worried that the grading schema doesn't allow the teacher to grant a lower grade than 50% for the former case.

 

[Darwin123]

This is an ongoing controversy. The point being that a kid getting 17 percent for totally slacking off the first quarter will figure out that there is no way to work his/her way up to a passing grade for the semester and will continue to slack off. (Many can do the math when it's about them.)

I see both sides. Zero for no work seems fair, but when dealing with children (which includes many/most high school students) you want to give them an incentive to keep trying.

If he absolutely can't work his way up to a passing grade in a certain subject, then he should slack off. He should put his energy into activities that he does better.

Better yet, he should go into an academic program that avoids or waters down that certain subject. He should be advised against working toward a career where that skill could be useful. He should be offered alternative careers where he has the necessary skills and temperament.

Hopefully, there could be a high paying career which can use his skills. A plumber or welder doesn't need trigonometry or Euclidean geometry. They could use spelling and grammar, however.

The problem isn't just minorities. I am a scientist working in a government laboratory. I have noted that many of my managers have no knowledge of science or mathematics. Many of them had an obvious deficiency in formal logic. Many of them don't have reading comprehension. They made twice as much as I do. However, most of them are white.

So I suspect that the some of the grades these managers in their schoolyard got had been purposely boosted out of prejudice. These managers will say straight out that they don't think much of scientists and academics. So I can see how an administrator would be tempted to ignore grades completely.

Grades could still be useful. Please don't remove grades. What should be changed is the way grades are used to channel students. Maybe there should be more vocational tracks through school. People who have manual skills could benefit people more if they don't waste energy trying to learn the most abstract subjects.



A student who is discouraged by one zero probably isn't a good student. The best students in a subject are those that can recover from a few bad experiences. So I am NOT suggesting all students with bad math grades become plumbers.

A student who knows he is interested in math shouldn't be thrown out of an academic curriculum because of one bad grade. So I believe in forgiveness with grades. However, I can't see raising the baseline.

Anyway, isn't the baseline arbitrary anyway?

If grades below 50 are no longer permitted, then 50 becomes the new 0. So what would be the upside, or even downside, of eliminating grades below 50?

 

[quixotecoyote]

If grades below 50 are no longer permitted, then 50 becomes the new 0. So what would be the upside, or even downside, of eliminating grades below 50?

Because the math is different? A blown test with a 50 and a missed test with a 0 both have an F as a letter for that particular grade, but the impact on the record as a whole is different.

I mean, the difference is the core of the argument. Shouldn't this have been the first question, not a tacked on afterthought?

 

[fuelair]

Because the math is different? A blown test with a 50 and a missed test with a 0 both have an F as a letter for that particular grade, but the impact on the record as a whole is different.

I mean, the difference is the core of the argument. Shouldn't this have been the first question, not a tacked on afterthought?

One more reminder: if that(whatever) is the standard required by the governing authority over the school district(s), that is how it will be done. Addressing dislike of it to teachers has no effect. And addressing those who are working with the teachers/blaming them or arguing the required grading methods accomplishes nothing. All complaints should be going to Bs of E and political representatives as well as the Education Department of the state!!

 

[Minoosh]

Who are you really rewarding? The kid who did nothing for half a semester or the teacher who allowed the kid to do nothing for half a semester?

I would hope to be rewarding the kid who found motivation in the second half of the semester. At any rate I'm not intent on punishing that kid either, for being depressed or distracted or hungry or horny or any of the other afflictions that human adolescents are prone to. Nor am I interested in punishing teachers who are generally nice people who work their behinds off.

 

[Minoosh]

If he absolutely can't work his way up to a passing grade in a certain subject, then he should slack off. He should put his energy into activities that he does better.

Better yet, he should go into an academic program that avoids or waters down that certain subject. He should be advised against working toward a career where that skill could be useful. He should be offered alternative careers where he has the necessary skills and temperament.

People's propensities aren't carved in stone at 14, IMO. That might be a little early to write them off an academic track.

Hopefully, there could be a high paying career which can use his skills. A plumber or welder doesn't need trigonometry or Euclidean geometry.

IMO, geometry and even trig are maybe less of a reach than algebra for many students. Maybe because they're older when they take them, I don't know.

Grades could still be useful. Please don't remove grades. What should be changed is the way grades are used to channel students. Maybe there should be more vocational tracks through school. People who have manual skills could benefit people more if they don't waste energy trying to learn the most abstract subjects.

This proposal is subject to prevailing whims of fashion. There was a voc track, then that was seen as discriminatory, then there was an academic track for all students, then people realized maybe that had been taken too far. And so it goes.

A student who is discouraged by one zero probably isn't a good student. The best students in a subject are those that can recover from a few bad experiences. So I am NOT suggesting all students with bad math grades become plumbers.

Lots of 14-year-olds are terrible students. We try to sequester the acutely pubescent in "middle school"; however sometimes they still arrive at high school with less than a burning desire to master algebra.

A student who knows he is interested in math shouldn't be thrown out of an academic curriculum because of one bad grade. So I believe in forgiveness with grades. However, I can't see raising the baseline.

Anyway, isn't the baseline arbitrary anyway?

If grades below 50 are no longer permitted, then 50 becomes the new 0. So what would be the upside, or even downside, of eliminating grades below 50?

A not-so-deep hole to work one's way out of. Note, I am not aggressively advocating such a move; I just don't write it off as a completely worthless idea.

 

[psionl0]

One more reminder: if that(whatever) is the standard required by the governing authority over the school district(s), that is how it will be done. Addressing dislike of it to teachers has no effect. And addressing those who are working with the teachers/blaming them or arguing the required grading methods accomplishes nothing. All complaints should be going to Bs of E and political representatives as well as the Education Department of the state!!

This reminder is probably not necessary. AFAIK, nobody in this thread is blaming teachers for this latest "new innovation" in education.

 

[psionl0]

I would hope to be rewarding the kid who found motivation in the second half of the semester.

It might prove harmful for the student anyway. A struggling student risks deciding that they don't have to try since they are getting marks anyhow thus depriving themselves of the chance that they might improve. Class mates may also decided that it is unfair that they have to work while the non-achiever gets their marks for free and also quit trying.

I know that this sort of reasoning is not entirely sensible but sensible reasoning is not necessarily a strong suit for teenagers.

 

[Minoosh]

They get a free F. They'd still have to work to pass.

I don't really get the unfair part, if all students start out at 50 percent. Once again I'm not wedded to the 50 percent figure.

Also IIRC from my community college math courses, we were allowed up to a page of notes for tests and were allowed to drop the lowest test score from the average.

The first school I first worked at had a freshman-algebra flunk rate of over 50 percent. The grade was 90 percent tests and quizzes. My current school flunks far fewer students, partly because someone like me will hunt down kids with D's and F's and hold them after school until they complete missing assignments. It's a generous policy but one that does have consequences for the student: staying after school.

I don't believe in eliminating F's, but would like to see them as a last resort. Students do need to know they can fail, I agree.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I didn't make up this stuff about ordinal data. This is standard mathematical teaching. A GPA may be a popular method of measuring student achievement but it doesn't make it mathematically valid. The only valid averages with ordinal data are median and mode.

It's NOT ordinal.

 

[psionl0]

I don't really get the unfair part, if all students start out at 50 percent.

Teenaged students don't need much of an excuse to avoid making an effort. If it gets them out of doing work, they will all scream in unison, "UNFAIR!"

 

[psionl0]

It's NOT ordinal.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

someone like me will hunt down kids with D's and F's and hold them after school until they complete missing assignments.

But does it help them to know and understand the subject matter, or just a chore they have to do?

Silly me, of course it's just a chore. The main purpose of school is to instill a strong work ethic!

 

[Minoosh]

But does it help them to know and understand the subject matter, or just a chore they have to do?

Silly me, of course it's just a chore. The main purpose of school is to instill a strong work ethic!

It is obviously a chore, but ones that does help them them understand the material for a while. Many will soon forget but will get reinforcement in subsequent years.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Because the math is different? A blown test with a 50 and a missed test with a 0 both have an F as a letter for that particular grade, but the impact on the record as a whole is different.

I mean, the difference is the core of the argument. Shouldn't this have been the first question, not a tacked on afterthought?

One more reminder: if that(whatever) is the standard required by the governing authority over the school district(s), that is how it will be done. Addressing dislike of it to teachers has no effect. And addressing those who are working with the teachers/blaming them or arguing the required grading methods accomplishes nothing. All complaints should be going to Bs of E and political representatives as well as the Education Department of the state!!

I don't understand why I was quoted here.

 

[applecorped]

Just raise it to 80 and pass everyone

 

[Minoosh]

Just raise it to 80 and pass everyone

We could do that with 60, but I don't think anyone is proposing that just yet.

 

[psionl0]

We could do that with 60, but I don't think anyone is proposing that just yet.

Maybe not the actual numbers but there is a popular view within the bureaucracy that all forms of testing and assessment should be banned because it might be traumatic for the little darlings.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Maybe not the actual numbers but there is a popular view within the bureaucracy that all forms of testing and assessment should be banned because it might be traumatic for the little darlings.

Pretty sure it's not a "popular view within the bureaucracy". Maybe a "popular view with a very small handful of people, some of whom have a voice in bureaucracy".

 

[psionl0]

Pretty sure it's not a "popular view within the bureaucracy". Maybe a "popular view with a very small handful of people, some of whom have a voice in bureaucracy".

Are you kidding? That was the entire concept behind "Outcomes Based Education". Teachers were expected to assess students on various "outcomes" (not knowledge or skills) on an individual basis without letting the student know so that they would not be placed under any sort of pressure.