babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
The problem from these types of grading policy si that the grade begins to measure other things besides an assessment of a quality of the work. For me this isn't a discussion of proper consequences, and I agree children should face natural consequences, Timebandit. For me, it is a question of what is that grade supposed to mean.
On my most cynical days, and having done a B.Ed, I feel that grades can be an impediment to learning.
That's one of the best arguments against French Immersion I've ever heard, Caissa. French and history at the same time?! What's that class supposed to be about? ;)
I don't think the expectation that you do the assignments and hit the deadlines impairs learning the skills and information specific to, say, English or math in any way. The teacher needs to assess the student and they need to have the material to back up that assessment if there is any dispute. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a mark on something you haven't done, or in a class you've phoned in rather than giving a full effort. If a full effort is being given and there's an issue, then the parents need to be involved and other supports put in place.
Personally, I think it's okay to learn how to hit a deadline at the same time as learn the content. Unless, of course, they plan to have a class on time management, which I don't see in the curriculum at this point.
How about the person who made that absurd comment. You are the master of disguised personal attacks. I commend you for your abilities and prowess in that area. Have a nice day you wonderful progressive ally.
adjective. 1. utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation. noun ...
I don't think we are disagreeing that it is important to learn to meet deadlines, Timebandit.
Is the teacher assesing the student when they receive a grade of for example 85?
I think assessment takes place when a teacher sets a test or an assignment of some type and the assessment is of the product created by the student rather than an assessment of a student. In reality, a test score says nothing more than that a student on a given day on a given test scored a certain mark. It can say very little about what a student knows especially when teachers often are less than specific about their learning objectives and when they are sometimes fail to have their assessments in line with those objectives.
I think you're right that we are really talking about a fine distinction. When I talk about assessing a student, I'm talking about assessing the student's understanding of the subject material and their level of work. Part of that is having it done in a timely manner. A teacher can't be expected to assess work that either hasn't been done or that they haven't seen. I think it's utterly unreasonable to make assignments optional, which I know would be the case with my daughter if there was no consequence to not doing the boring work (in her opinion) or getting it together enough to hand in.
@ kropotkin1951
Had that been what I was up to, it would be in order to thank you. But in reality, I was just addressing your argument. You are imagining things.
Fact is, if you are going to put something out there, be prepared to have people comment on it.
Timebandit, I am saying that all assessments are flawed. They do not assess what a student knows, they assess how well a student does on the asessment.
If there is nothing to asess, I think a reasonable, real consequence would be that the student cannot progress until an asessment has been able to take place.
Needless to say those two paragraphs are addressing two different questions.
I will adopt your respectful approach and state that the above statement is the most ludicrous piece of drivel I have read in a long time.
I don't have a clue what the first sentence even means and as for the "but" clarifying that statement I am glad you live in "reality." Do I live in some sort of absurd fantasy world?
Excellent point.
@ kropotin1951
I'll just say that I don't assume that you are calling me personally ludicrous or drivel.
Beyond that, if you want to present an actual argument in response to the points I have made, feel free.
I have try reading them.
Extremes don't make headlines and they also don't make sense.
A student should not get a mark for work they did not do. They should also not get a zero for lateness.
Sorry but one of the functions of being a teacher is to report so advising students and parents of outstanding assignments is not unreasonable. I suggest there could be one day in each semester when this is done advising them that anything handed in up to this time would be marked although a portion of the mark would recognize punctuality.
I support the following approach:
A student should lose marks for being late unless they have some kind of exception due to a reasonable explanation. Those marks must be proportional. The main object is to learn. To produce work on time is also an object, however, and the ability to hand in something late is an advantage. 10-20% of a mark could be for meeting the deadline and would account for the advantage one has of extra time and reward following instructions for a deadline. Once you have lost all the marks that are allocated to handing in an assignment on time then you should lose no more provided you get something in before the end of the semester.
Perhaps timeliness, format etc could be a set percentage of the assignment so if you hand it in on time you get those. Students should not lose marks for not doing something others do not gain for doing it. So you could have an assignment, for example, that has 10% for instructions; 10% for being on time; 40% for accuracy; 40% for concept... (or some breakdown of components). someone handing in something on time would get the on-time marks -- someone who did not would miss out on those but get graded on the rest. The on-time percentage would be set based on the importance of being on time/advantage of extra time so could vary. However, it could not be whole thing unless everyone that handed in something on time got 100%
If you are within a certain length of time of the end of a semester then a notification should go to all students and their parents if they are minors of outstanding work. This is not onerous on the teacher but basic reporting. If the work is not done by the end of the semester when marks must be recorded the student can take either a zero at that time or an incomplete for the course with a new deadline to get the item in at a reduced mark. At times an incomplete might be impractical and a zero the only option.
Students in general should not get marks for something that was not done having been given all the opportunity to complete it. Under some circumstances, however, due to illness or documented explanation exceptions could apply so long as they are reasonable. In those documented cases averaging of work done or substitute assignments could be considered.
In other words marks should be proportional to value-- handing in something on time has a value which should be recognized but it is not the only value being marked.
The two extremes-- giving marks for work not done and penalizing for lateness at 100% and not allowing completion late are equally indefensible and actually both do not fit real world experience. Most things can be done late -- at some penalty in the real world and there is at least some penalty to being late as well.
Fine, all assessments are flawed. I think the no-zero policy is more flawed than the alternative. As Smith saide above, I can understand it in the context of elementary school, but not for high school.
I'm not a big fan of the school system. My kids are asynchronous developers and it's not always easy to navigate the system. I don't think removing expectations - simple ones, like "do the work and hand it in" - is helpful to anyone, even though, sometimes, this is our biggest challenge. Believe me, if anyone's life would be easier under the no-zero policy, it would be my daughter's and by association mine! I do think, though, if we don't teach them to handle that kind of expectation, we are setting them up to fail when they leave high school. I can't be having that.
I'll add to the above-- knowing what the reasonable consequences are allows students to make choices-- giving up the 10% of timeliness marks on one assignment to study for a test due the same day is a calculation of the sort adults need to learn to make. As long as the consequences are fair, measured and proportional then that is not unfair. It is just as unfair to have no consequences as to have disproportionately punitive ones-- and both are a distortion of the learning process.
I'm not arguing for a system where students do not have to pass the work in. I'm arguing there is nothing to assess if the work is not passed in. If there is nothing to assess, I can't imagine how students can pass on to the next level of learning.
@Caissa - Isn't that just a zero by another name?
@Sean - My daughter's teachers will reduce the mark according to how late the assignment is. However, there is a point where there is no going back, and the mark is then zero for the assignment. I think that's fair because the teacher has a deadline for submitting marks and a work load to manage as well. She got very angry with me on one of those when I made her finish the assignment anyway - and she hasn't been as late since.
Perhaps we are all saying the same thing-- no to zeros based on arbitrary deadlines but the end of the semester when the teacher has to hand in marks is not an arbitrary deadline and a teacher ought not to make up a mark to go in if there is nothing there --
I am okay with incomplete's, however, where practical. Obviously that can be a problem if a student has a bunch of those so I guess there would need to be an end deadline for those as well.
Lots of us have trouble with marks for no work-- but that is only one extreme -- zeros for lateness is the other.
How do people feel about my suggestion that there be a mark for timeliness but not a penalty? -- in other words those that comply get it and those who don't miss out or get partial if they were close. This would mean that lateness deductions would have to be proportionate rather than punitive and limited to perhaps 10-20% since those who hand in on time something complete will get those marks automatically. This seems like a way of keeping the system honest and putting a correct balance on the things being marked. Being on time is not worth 100%, but it is worth something and ought to be marked accordingly.
I guess it depends to me on how many marks are taken off. As I say there should be only a small percentage for late-- not handed in at all, however, can only be incomplete or zero-- but with latest practical real deadline not just after a certain lateness.
We don't want to distort this by suggesting any old crap on time is okay as that is what can happen when being late is a zero.
I remember in school myself with a reasonable teacher doing the calculation of whether I was better handing in something really good late or what I had on time. It is not a bad thing to learn either. you learn to find out what the penalty is and make your decision-- a lot like real life.
Isn't that better than abandoning things that are late?
And if she does forfeit the marks until she learns that things have to be on time isn't that fair?
the point I think is to be fair and proportionate not to make it easier for parents. It is a lesson to not give up the easy-to-get marks which makes you have to work harder for the others-- but while it may be difficult the lesson is huge and rewarding. By either giving no zeros or allowing zeros easily with no more responsibility, you end up avoiding -- putting off that lesson. This is the key to personal responsibility.
You of course would have to teach your child the difference in value between a mark in the 60s and a mark in the 80s... but that seems fair to me.
BTW I too have kids with this challenge. I don't find the lack of proportion teaches them anything useful. I'd also say that what is not proportionate is not fair and kids have a remarkable sensitivity to what is fair and what is not fair is not respected -- and they don't learn from it. You might be surprised by how a more moderate policy might change behaviour more easily than a more extreme one. In fact it did for me personally... That said every kid is different and some might find this a challenge but so too might others-- one zero given early and some kids will lose all motivation for the course.
Unfortunately, that's not the case with too many parents.
To many people, consequences for individual failures are an anathema to them. To them, individuals bear little, if any, responsibility for their own decisions and any adverse consequences an individual may suffer are largely, if not exclusively, due to "the system" (whether it's management, teachers, the rich, or various other oppressors). So, it doesn't surprise me in the least that some people want to apply that same concept to students: A kid doesn't turn in homework? Well, we better have a safety net for them and pass them through school system anyway because it's critical for a student to at least have a high school diploma, whether the kid has earned one or not, so we can't very well deny them that certification based on some arbitrary standard created by the system.
Look, I grew up in a home with very few material advantages (my mother, for example, made almost all of my clothes by hand - and after I turned 18 and left home for good, the sum total of the financial support I received from my parents was 200 bucks). But, I received riches from them that I still benefit from: Understanding the concept of delay gratification, the value of diligence and persistence when dealing with a difficult problem, and the like. That has served me well over the years, in my personal life, in my academic life, and in my professional life. Teaching kids that poor behavior has no adverse consequences to them will make them feel powerless when they face adversity as adults.
I'm not sure it is a lack of proportion to give a zero to an assignment that is weeks late. That might be your opinion, but maybe you and a particular teacher have a difference of opinion on that point. You teach your kids that it's optional to be on time, and it is... Until they're in a job or a university class and it isn't. I'd rather deal with a lesser consequence now than the big one down the road. Minimizing consequence now results in a misunderstanding of what the consequence will be down the road.
The thing is, my kid wouldn't be forfeiting the marks until she learns that things have to be in on time - she'd just learn that things being in on time is optional. Without a consequence and the school backing me up (and believe you me that the school likes it when I back them up, so I don't feel bad about asking it to go both ways), I can't teach her otherwise. I'd rather not have the school hamstring me in the course of teaching my kid life skills.
And as for sensitivity to fairness... Well, at some point you have to accept that some things may not be fair in your eyes and you'll have to look at it from another angle. As I've pointed out, multiple warnings, extensions for good reasons for being late and clear policy set out at the beginning of the year seems pretty fair to me. So I'm not actually talking about teachers giving zeroes "easily" - in fact, I haven't encountered any situation where the zero was given without warning and merit. If you ignore all of that, then cry "not fair", you need to reassess what's fair and what isn't. It also doesn't hurt a kid to be faced with a challenge to their idea of what's fair and what isn't. My 11 year old feels that it is deeply unfair to be denied ice cream half an hour after refusing an adequate dinner, but it doesn't mean she's right. Sometimes the best response to "not fair" is "tough nuts".
I'm not sure how old your kids are - if they're still in elementary school you may have a point. My oldest is in high school, my youngest is in the latter part of elementary. Tweens and teens are more difficult to work with in this respect.
In many respects, developing key personal character traits (persistence, meeting deadlines, diligence, etc.) are more important than the content students may learn in a particular class.
Actually in real life lateness in some cases devalues the product a little, sometimes a lot-- it depends and it is generally practical rather than arbitrary. Kids have different reasons for being late and I don't think that it always merits a wipe-out. I don't think extra harshness is that useful for learning either. A count-down to nothing is unusual in life-- there is at times a point where you get a "zero" when it is just too late but otherwise there is only so much damage for lateness. Those that think a countdown like 10% a day to nothing in ten days reflects reality would be hard pressed to find anything like that in the out-of-school world.
I agree some marks lost is reasonable and that at the end of the semester when marks are handed in, if there is not a mark, zero it is. But the reality is kids have different challenges and learn their life skills not in the same order as all the others. The benefit a zero might bring (in your view) to your kid could be an insurmountable obstacle to another. And learning that 10% to lose for lateness is still a lot is also a lesson. There are other details like sloppiness, lack of proofreading or checking work also lead to a reduction in marks. Kids need to learn that these add up even if they do not appear catastrophic and that itself is a life lesson.
That said, I do not question a teacher that gives a zero. The reason is one life lesson is that some people are harder than others and you do have to learn this. However, I don't support a hard line down the line.
All that said I think our difference is minor since you are speaking of multiple chances etc. -- well that is what I am saying really except that I suggest end of semester-- so there are only so many weeks before you hit end of semester. We are agreed on what happens then. So only difference is in some cases it sounds like you would agree with a zero mid way when I think it would be better not to.
I'll add another point: some kids are better at self-advocacy and many teachers are biased -- they cannot help but be because they care. This means that the kid who for reasons that may not all be her/his fault who is a little less enjoyable is less likely to get granted an exception. And when you are too hard you have to give more exceptions and less predictable consequences. That sort of thing is not fair and it is a life lesson kids can learn a little later. Also the issue of teacher responsibility for hounding is more of a deal if you have zero deadlines through the semester. If the end of the semester is the deadline for a zero then a warning can go out to parents and students 3-4 weeks before and that's that. I also think that report cards should include any docked marks for lateness as important information so the student gets a report that says say; 80% - 10% (for example) for lateness= 70%. This gives both the parents and the student valuable information about both the consequence of the lates and a more accurate idea of what the kid knows.
There are more to study habits than that but I'll agree study habits often trump content in importance.
The problem with zeros is you don't get marks for the other things and it hides both improvements and problems
@ Sean: Actually, in my real life missing a deadline can mean losing a lot of money or potentially going out of business. Other deadlines, with mitigation (and a plan) can be pushed, but it will damage my credibility which in turn may mean that I'm less likely to get the next contract. So in my view, deadlines are extremely important.
I think you and I disagree on what constitutes "extra harshness". If the rules are laid out in advance and warnings are given, then I don't see the policy being enforced as harsh at all. With my hard deadlines, there isn't any such luxury as a countdown, you either hit it or you're out. Given that it's kids we're talking about, I think having the countdown is fair enough.
I'm aware that kids develop different skills at different points in their development. See upthread, where I noted that both my kids are asynchronous developers. They've been out of step with the median and average around which the system and its expectations have been built since day one. We have had conflicts and difficulties with teachers over this, over bullying being condoned because of teacher bias, etc, so I am well aware of how bias works. But if you have a kid that doesn't self-advocate well, then it's up to the parent to step in and teach them how to do that.
When there really is an inability, you go to the teacher and work with them and make arrangements when you need to. However, in the absence of a need based on a disability, I think it's okay for your kids to run up against an unpleasant consequence. And please note that I am not talking about making the deadlines and the system of mark reduction so hard that there is too much room for exception. A reasonable policy reasonably explained is something that should work, and it shouldn't necessarily mean that the end of the semester is good enough - as far as the teacher managing workflow, that might not be a reasonable expectation for the teacher. I also want to point out again that I'm talking about high school students, here.
Your point about other things that lose marks - sloppiness, lack of checking work, etc - is sort of moot. So my kid and another kid are taking the same class. The other kid improves the mark by finding ways to improve the quality of their work, my kid improves her mark by getting that quality work done and handed in on time. Everybody's learning something. I'm not sure why one should more exception made because they're not good at being on time and the other shouldn't because they're not careful.
There is no evidence that a zero will teach a student not to be late or not to shirk their work. Most people arguing against the board's policy appear to be making that assumption.
If the idea is to do away with the alpha-numeric way of grading academic progress, shouldn't there be something in its place? How does a system designed for uniformity deal with the concept of individuality?
Beg to differ, Catchfire. It has made some impression in our household. I recognize that the plural of anecdote is not data, but for some kids (note I'm not claiming this as working for all, as I pointed out in my first post in this thread), but I'm reasonably convinced that my kid would have been far less tractable about learning to hit her deadlines without that consequence.
Rebecca - good question. I don't think it can. It's up to us as individuals to learn how to deal with that.
It's really simple.
We live in a society where the livelihood of the vast majority is daily judged by a tiny minority of wealthy and powerful, and where any flaw, real or imagined, can mean failure, impoverishment, or worse. Competition between individuals for survival is the highest good. Ensuring that every individual succeeds, and that every effort at accommodation is made toward that end, is a useless f***ing waste of time and money.
So really, there are two choices:
1. Work with like-minded people to change this vicious and inhumane social order. OR
2. Accept that this is humanity's permanent condition, and simply prepare young people to swim or sink in it. Forget about that idealistic crap that education is aimed at making human beings better, rather than just filtering out the losers.
In short, the following is not the kind of world I want my education system to prepare people for (although I fully recognize that Timebandit is describing it accurately):