Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Across Texas, there is a new grading law called "Truth in Grading" where teachers are required to assign the exact grade the student earned instead of assigning a 50 or 60 to failing work.
Districts have revised their grading policy to include a students ability to retake failing grades within a reasonable time. Some districts have even attached a requirement of teachers to reteach the material before retesting by offering tutorials. The failing student will get the new grade, however, students recieving a 70 cannot retest to try to get a 95.
It seems to me that it should be left up to the local districts to decide their grading policies. It doesn't seem to make sense to assign a grade to a student who didn't complete the work. For example, how can you assign a 50 or 60 if the assignment wasn't done? Perhaps an "Incomplete" would be better? How can a 50 be assigned if less than 50% of something was done correctly?
It is tough for me to relate because we don't use percentage based grading and in two years our progress reports will be changing to even more standards based reporting. Students will receive either a 1,2,3 or 4.
"1"= Consistently demonstrates concepts and skills of standards taught this quarter.
"2"= Usually demonstrates...
"3"= Sometimes demonstrates...
"4"= Seldom demonstrates...
"na"= Introduced, but not assessed.
"nt"= Not taught.
I'm a high school student in Texas, and I've never heard of assigning anything but the exact grade, even if it was below a 50. It seems like having a minimum grade policy is just a crutch for school districts to have a better graduation rate for underachieving students. On paper the law against minimum grades is fair, but you could potentially be talking about even more high school drop outs running around if it's actually enforced, which IMO is an even worse situation. I think this law will join the ranks of political grandstands that aren't actually enforced.
I am of two minds on this. On the one hand, I believe in accountability. On the other, I've seen how some of my colleagues do their grades and... yikes. I have never seen this implemented on assignments themselves (where kids still get zeros), but rather on 6-week grading period final scores.
You have to keep in mind two things. One, this applies only to a small percentage of students. Most students do not get such terribly low scores. Even students who fail tend to fail above a 50, in general.
So the students this affects is the very lowest of the low, the ones who would have gotten a "5" as a grade, instead get a "50." What's the good in it? Well, if you get a "5", it is then mathematically impossible for you to bring that up to passing for the semester. So if a kid has a terrible 1st 6-weeks (for whatever reason--maybe their grandpa died, or brother committed suicide, or they got molested, or they're just a slacker), getting a "5" means that there is no way they can pass the 1st semester. They will fail. So basically, there's no point in them doing any work from October-January. They're just screwed. If you give them a "50" there's still a chance. If they got "B's" for the next two grading periods, they would average in with that failing score and bring it up to a "70" to pass the semester... not a great score, but pass. Kids have a hard time thinking long-term and some (especially these kids) are quick to give up. If they have a chance, if they know if they start working NOW they can still pass, there's a chance to do something. If you fail them with a "5" after one marking period and they're screwed for the next 4 months? Yeah, that's going to go well. This gives the administration time to intervene. It gives the teachers time to intervene. It gives the parents time to intervene. Yes, the parents should have been on top of the kid before, but you have to remember that we're talking the lowest of the low... these aren't the kids with perfect situations, and most of their parents didn't have the luxury of perfect situations either.
Do I think this is perfect? No, I don't. But I also don't know HOW to reach those "hopeless" kids. Retention doesn't work long-term, or for more than one year. The kids drop out because they don't want to be a 15 year old in the 6th grade. So, if this incentive works for a few kids? Great. If it doesn't motivate them to try? Then they fail anyway (doesn't really matter if you fail with a 50 or a 20, you still fail) and it was a wash.
I'm a high school student in Texas, and I've never heard of assigning anything but the exact grade, even if it was below a 50. It seems like having a minimum grade policy is just a crutch for school districts to have a better graduation rate for underachieving students. On paper the law is fair, but you could potentially be talking about even more high school drop outs running around if it's actually enforced, which IMO is an even worse situation. I think this law will join the ranks of political grandstands that aren't actually enforced.
That's because you're not privileged to see the grades of your classmates. The rule doesn't apply to assignments themselves... you can still get a "zero" on your math homework, or get a "35" on your test. But if your average for the marking period (where your report card gets sent home) was a "35" the teacher would raise it to a "50." Probably you've just never scored that low for a marking period (which is a good thing! Keep up the good work!)
That's because you're not privileged to see the grades of your classmates. The rule doesn't apply to assignments themselves... you can still get a "zero" on your math homework, or get a "35" on your test. But if your average for the marking period (where your report card gets sent home) was a "35" the teacher would raise it to a "50." Probably you've just never scored that low for a marking period (which is a good thing! Keep up the good work!)
I just got a failing grade at reading the articles.
For me anything below 70 on a report card grade just means you failed, so what is the benefit of leaving a student's grade at a 30 where they have virtually no chance of passing, instead of a 60-65? Who knows, maybe the student had a major life event that caused them not to care about school for a term and now they have no way to recuperate. We only have 4 terms so, for us, there is not much chance a low student will get motivated again if they have to make above an 82 or above for the remaining three terms.
For me anything below 70 on a report card grade just means you failed, so what is the benefit of leaving a student's grade at a 30 where they have virtually no chance of passing, instead of a 60-65? Who knows, maybe the student had a major life event that caused them not to care about school for a term and now they have no way to recuperate. We only have 4 terms so, for us, there is not much chance a low student will get motivated again if they have to make above an 82 or above for the remaining three terms.
When my grown children were in school, I didn't accept anything below a "C". I didn't want to hear excuses. Because is none. I made it known they would hate me if I had to speak to their teacher because of their grades/behavior. They did well, although three of them dropped out for non-academic reasons. The problem with giving the student with a 30 a 60-65 instead, is that it devalues the work of a student who earned a 60-65 IMO. We want our kids to compete with the rest of the world, but we want to make it easy
I think E for Effort is a good way to say a student is completing required academic criteria, even if the student is not passing. The F is a nasty letter and they should do away with it. I think if a student puts forth the effort to be there and is not passing that it could be the person doing the teaching that is inadequate. I am looking at this outside of the box. There is alot that should be said and never does. Some of this idle energy needs to be put to good use by looking at these issues from different perspectives. L for Loser would be another way to damage the esteem of a student, what do you think?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
