I am posting this entry in response to an article from the Las Vegas Sun entitled, "A Floor For Failing Grades". This article depicts that some schools in the American southwest are making the effort to set a grade of 50, or 59 in some schools, as the new "minimum F". The raising of the minimum F is intended to give weaker students a better chance of passing. Ideally, the goal of this initiative is to keep them from becoming "prematurely doomed" by the numbers that stand strong behind report card letter grades.
The school district in question's grading system convert's each student's numerical scores to letter grades. All students that score below a 60, whether they are 59, 29, or 0, still will earn an F letter grade. The numerical scores carry through and also determine the final letter grades for each semester, as well as at the end of the school year. This proposed highering of the minimum F thus will make it so that if a student has a very low F in the first half of the semester, it could cause him or her to fail the class regardless of a drastic change in overall performance. Basically, they've lost before they've decided to even begin.
Advocates for a change like this continue to argue that this is the way to keep kids from giving up. If students were to learn that they don't even have a shot at passing the class at the end of the year simply based on their performance in the beginning of the year, chances are that would be the end of what little motivation they may have still possessed. Andre Denson, southeast region superintendent, went on record with stating his logic: "What do we tell our students who are failing in October- 'Go home, there's no hope for you, come back in January'? With a 50 percent minimum, a kid has a chance."
Like all hot button topics, there is another side to the argument as well. Many teachers and parents alike disapprove of the new grading concept. Sherry Harmon, a mother of a seventh grader at Thurman White Middle School claims to have very mixed feelings regarding the new grading methods. She states that, "Eventually, kids are going to have to go on to college and into the real world. What happens when someone isn't willing to give them 50 points for doing nothing?" Other parental figures have been noted as saying that even if a student were to slack off, but put in a minimul amount of effort, chances are they should still be able to pull off a C.
The question I ask myself after contemplating the subject matter of this article is this: Will it even matter to those it concerns the most--the kids? Whether the minimum F be a 0, or a 50, some kids, I believe may not even care. However, I do think the new policy's intentions are in the right place in the manner of giving kids a second chance of sorts if they were to have a change of heart regarding their performance. Although, such a switch in policy may lead some kids to continue to slack off even more simply because a 50 doesn't seem nearly as bad as a 0. Regardless of scoring, among other things, we are trying to teach our kids the ability to evaluate themselves individually without someone having to tell them whether or not they are right or wrong. We are teaching these children to be concious of themselves not only as individuals, but also as members of their community. Teaching mediocrity, as one blogger responding to this article already put it, isn't the answer. We should be teaching students to have a desire to achieve rather than boosting grades for the simple reason that it may help them if they choose to take the opportunity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
No, not everyone is your average Einstein, but what these Clark County schools are doing is absolutely un-heard of in my opinion. Giving students a choice to more or less do “nothing” and still receive a grade of 50% is not normal. A grade of fifty is far off from a big fat zero! In most school districts a 50 at least shows some sort of work that was done, obviously poor work but at least something. Now this school is granting students the ability of getting a 50 by doing no work at all.
I understand that not everyone is smart, and maybe stronger in some subjects then others. When it comes down to the fact of struggling in say math, get help! Communicate with your teachers, conduct study groups, do something about it rather than nothing at all. Advocates say “it is intended to give weaker students a better chance at passing”. So weak that they can’t complete their work or get help? In my school district a grade of 65% was passing. If you failed, then you failed-plain and simple. There was no pity party for you. You had no choice other than to take the class over until you passed. Just like Sherry Horman quoted: “Eventually, kids are going to have to go on to college and into the real world. What happens when someone isn’t going to give them 50 points for doing nothing?” This is exactly true! No college that I have ever been to allows you to do little to no work and receive a grade of 50%.
I agree strongly with Jordan when he says “We should be teaching students to have a desire to achieve rather than boosting grades for the simple reason that it may help them if they choose to take the opportunity”. The way I look at it is, you have to work for the grades that you receive, or anything that you do in life for that matter. People should not be rewarding students for things that they don’t do. A grade of 50% is nowhere near a zero, not even close! Think about it-literally a zero means nothing, a 50 means half. There is a big difference between 0 and 50! They are not the same by any means and should not be put into comparison!
After reading Jordan's blog, "Does 0 + 0 Really = 50 percent," I could very well see how this new method could greatly help a student who is in need of that extra boost. Although that is the case for some, I think that for the kids who don't bother to do any work at all are simply getting a "reward" for doing nothing. As Gina Freedian's daughter who attends the eighth grade at Thurman White Middle School said, "These kids would know they could slack off a little more and still get by. If they're studying and putting in at least some effort, they should be able to pull a C." I find that to be a very strong point. Being rewarded for slacking off isn't fair. When a student is sent off from high school to enter college or the workforce, they are not going to be given any sort of advantage. With being given these advantages at a very young age would set them up for such disappointment when they are older.
I feel that the intentions to give a weaker student a better chance of passing is excellent, but just as Ryan Chahoc, an eighth grade honor student stated, "some kids just don't care."
Post a Comment