As I am sitting here filling out the “bubble sheets” for 3rd quarter grades and thinking in how certain students (and some parents) are going to react when they see them a question hits me:
When did a C stop meaning “average”?
It seems that more and more students feel that they deserve A’s and B’s simply because they worked hard on something regardless of the fact that what was turned in was simply “average” work. Now I am very carefully to set up a detailed rubric based on the specific instructions that I give before an assignment so that I know I am being as objective as possible. The problem is that so many of my students chose to ignore the little details like format, proper heading, 6-traits writing (yes even in a science class) and answering in complete sentences. And yet it is those students who come up to me at the end of the grading period saying “I just cannot come home with anything less than a B in your class”. I know this is a wacky notion but I think only those people who follow directions and put in the effort should receive the higher grades. But again, when did a C equate to “failing”?
Sometimes I feel that when I am explaining the instructions for an assignment that some of the things I say get lost as they leave my mouth and probably end up in that mystical place that socks disappear to when taken out of the drier. And I am sure that some of my students feel that I hand out “magic” paper that hides parts of the question on a test and then when I hand it back marked wrong those words just reappear. It is all an evil plot after all because it is never THEIR fault.
I generally see this to be a huge problem in the middle grades because a lot of these students have simply been graded on effort throughout the primary grades. I cannot tell you how many parents have yelled at me (parents sure do get good at scolding) that “my daughter has ALWAYS made straight A’s and B’s until she got to YOUR class!” And in the past I have even been accused of being a horrible person because I have the audacity to not give out extra credit – yes in my class a student’s grade is actually based on what they earned.
I know I am old school on this one but to me a C = average, B = above average and an A = excellent. If I am expected to give out better grades, what would that teach these students about accountability? Something that I keep telling my students is that the only difference between a C and an A in my class is EFFORT and not intelligence. Yes I hold them to a high standard and I think that only those students who chose to step up to the plate should expect a top grade. I know, I am such a monster.
Well I just averaged up all of my 3rd quarter grades and it looks like the average is a 76.4% - mission accomplished.
Now all I have to do is sit back, stare at my phone and wait for somebody to be upset….
riiiiinnnnggggg
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Don't you mean you want to be as objective as possible. I'd think you'd be getting a lot more phone calls if you were trying to be subjective.
Anyways, I agree with you that a C should be average. I came from a high school that had highly inflated grades, and when I got to college and started getting graded for real, it was quite a shock. Now, I have to work hard for that A or B.
hehehe - well you got me on that one and goes to show that that when I was in school I was not one of those people who got the straight "A's" because I did overlook the details. [I have since updated my typo].
Thank you for bringing up a great point - we are not doing our students any favors by padding their grades because that just sets them up for failure further down the line.
Strausser
Good for you. I handed out C's in my AP Physics class last semester, and I was expecting cries of anguish from students and parents. Yet the kids got what they deserved -- based on my experience with earlier classes, their effort and achievement rated C's. Surprisingly, I heard no complaints, perhaps because the people involved realize the course is really difficult. (In college, they would have probably failed ...)
I have found that providing parents with a clear summary of your expectations and the method you use to calculate grades is very helpful. If they see that little Susie has failed to hand in several assignments, the reason for her low grade is pretty clear. It also helps to quell that "effort" complaint. No assignments submitted = no effort.
We have a pretty demanding curriculum here, so most folks are willing to accept C's. Below 70%, they get no credit, so a C is acceptable. But we're a private high school, so the expectations are different.
The idea of average has gradually disappeared from our language. Education advocates have even gone so far as to remove it completely with things like Standards Based Grading. An individual can only be in one of four categories: below standard, approaching standard, at standard, or above standard.
I believe it is important to have standards, but also important to know where I compare to others. Am I an average teacher, and is that at standard or approaching standard? I don't know. Am I an above average teacher, and is that at standard or above standard? Again, I don't know--but I want to.
Good post.....rings true in SO many places.....
I make it a point to tell my students, at numerous times throughout the school year, that I DO NOT GIVE GRADES. I grade what you give me against what is expected. I often use a baseball or basketball anology.....what do you expect to be your batting average/shooting average if you just sit on the bench ? It is becoming one of my teaching pet peeves that teachers "GIVE" grades. Well, maybe some do....you mentioned the elem. teachers with their inflated grades because the kid turned in something, who cares if it is crap and the kid spelled their name wrong.
Wow really good post, this one hit home with me in particular...
The age of "But sir...I TRIED" have long past, I had to learn it the hard way.
Your post brings me back to my Chem classrom last year. Man was that a tough class. I can describe my Prof to be somewhat like yourself except...err a little more tough (Ok, a lot more tough). The guy will make you come back and REWRITE a test or quiz as MANY TIMES AS IT TAKES until you get a 80% on it and will still keep your orginal grade on that test/quiz even after you achieve that 80%, in his words...you can learn the material and get the marks or your gonna learn it anyways... The guy will mark you down HARD for using the wrong word in a write-up again and again and he will make sure that the research for your 3000 word term paper came from university libraries...
I wasn't prepared for that because no other class pays such attention to detail nor do they make you come back and re-write tests and most importantly, they didn't require you to work your ass off...(or to REALLY work your ass off)
I got a 51% in his class during mid-term. I obviously wasn't feeling too hot about the grade but if I learned anything in his class that year, it was if you're not going to work for it, you can make friends with your new "C" grade...
So you know what? Forget the parents who come complaning to you about their kids grade because their kids put in effort. The parents along with their kids need to wake up and smell the coffee and realize that by their kids simply "trying" is not going to cut it anymore. And how well their work is written/presented REALLY DO MATTER NOW, or they're going to be staying friends with that C for a VERY LONG time...
People don't believe in free lunches, schools don't believe in free marks.
Oh btw...I got a 83% at the end of the year from my chem class and I actually UNDERSTAND how the quantum mechanical model works.
We've linked this post over at The Education Wonks.
Reminds me of someone writing about how horrible homeschooled students perform accademically, by saying that "26% of homeschooled students fall below the 50th percentile"
Heaven forbid that someone fall below 50th percentile! Nobody should be down there
(sigh)
You posed the question, "When did a C stop meaning average?" I don't know exactly when, but it could have been an unintended side effect of eliminating the bell curve grading methods and replacing it with a criterion-based grading system.
I know of almost no teachers left who grade exclusively "on a curve."
However, if the criterion and standards they now use are not sufficiently rigorous we get "grade inflation."
I had some college profs who truly graded "on the curve." Even if you did poorly on the material but you were better than others in your particular class - you got a high grade. And vice versa.
I guess you could say this idea of "entitlement" is a social expectation that goes way beyond grades.
You have kids who worry about bringing home a B?
Half of my kids would get awarded with a PlayStation game or some other treat for a B!
I agree that C is average.
I just wish so many of my students weren't so willing to accept mediocrity.
Ahh! You see? Grade inflation has a BROAD definition! Any time students are not being graded on their actual competence/understanding/abilities--> grade inflation occurs. Whether or not the teacher is consciously aware of it!
Here is a letter I wrote recently to a writer from a local newspaper (I edited out names and addresses):
Dear ********,
I am a high school student at ***** ******* High School, part of the *** ******** Unified School District.
From my experience, serious grade inflation is ubiquitous among all courses and grade levels (9-12, freshman to senior), and I propose a solution to this problem.
"Grade inflation" includes not only "grading on an easy curve," but also "grading without curve, but on criteria that (often apparently) fails to accurately describe or reflect students' competence, knowledge, and ability." Often, that is the case among high school teachers, which, in my opinion, confuse "effort" and "competence".
Even in "honors" classes, particularly the humanities, a grade is often only 20-30% tests, and the rest is "effort"--i.e., homework, classwork, participation, etc. For an "organized binder with over 'x' quantity of notes", students can raise their grades from C's to A's, from D's to B's, and so on. For "doing all of the homework", students can expect similar results. Unfortunately, no "binder," no matter how "nice-looking and organized", no "art poster illustrating World War II", can substitute for a critical knowledge and understanding of the course material. It does not matter how well a student can "illustrate a soldier" or "how many pages of notes a student can write" or "how neatly can a student organize a binder" if they lack competence, knowledge, and understanding of the course material.
A critical effect of serious grading founded on faulty criteria is the "expectance of competence derived from blind effort and inflated grades." In classes of mathematics and the sciences, where tests and exams generally count for no less than ~70% of a student's grade, students often complain of low grades (primarily based on test scores), demanding "higher grades" because they "did" all of their homework and labs, and "studied for hours". Neither is an acceptable reason to improve grades. Mere "completion," and especially the "completion of homework and classwork" is ultimately worthless if students cannot (and do not learn to) focus their abilities individually in an environment devoid of "notes, resources, peers"....an environment consisting only of a pencil and the test paper.
Unfortunately, the effect of grading directly on "effort" is, most apparently, a retardation in one's "effort" and a sense of anti-intellectualism. When one student has to complete "four" skill sheets and study for "five hours" for a chemistry test, while another student needs just read the text for an hour or so to perform equally or (often times) better on a test, it is not fair to downgrade the latter student for a "lack of effort". Quite often, bright and high-scoring students are actually downgraded for a "lack of effort" in a high school course. Underperforming and incompetent students may argue "It's not fair that he/she's is more efficient than us," and the teacher often willingly takes pity on those students. No longer is "competence" required; all that is required for an "A" is effort, and thus "everybody passes". Simply grade students on "how many review sheets did you complete" and "how neat is your binder" and therefore, "everybody can succeed," even those ridiculously unprepared for the course. Not only are such rewards for mere "effort" undoubtedly anti-intellectual, they can, and often do, remove the entire purpose of effort---to learn and gain competence.
The final problem I will address here is the perceived "nature" of effort.
-Joe is preparing for a test, and has worked on 62 problems in factoring. Unfortunately, the test also includes "completing-the-square problems." Joe spends all of his time working ""hard"" on the factoring problems, but fails the test because he forgot to learn how to complete-the-square. And rightfully so does he fail that test. Without a doubt, Joe "worked hard"; unfortunately, he did not "work smart". The next day, he demands a raise in grades due to his "hard work". By no means does Joe deserve a higher grade; not because he didn't work "hard" (which he undoubtedly did), but because he failed to work "smart" and efficiently. A sad case for any teacher deciding grades. Worse, when this case does arise, the student who worked "less hard" but aced the test (and gain knowledge, skills, and competence) is often penalized with a grade based on 20-30% tests, and 70-80% "effort"---for what is, essentially, "achieving more (competence, knowledge, and ability) with less effort" and downplaying the idea that "(blind and often useless) 'effort' in itself will bestow competence."
Conclusion:
Effort is a means of acquiring (the goals of) competence, knowledge, and understanding. In itself, it is not a goal. How much is needed and how it should be executed varies from individual to individual. We must not grade students on the "quantity of effort", but rather on the quality of their effort, which is reflected in class tests and the SAT, a measure of how much competence, knowledge, and skills the students, both as students and as individuals, possess.
Regarding your article, such a grade quota is obviously ill-conceived if it does not include any way to check teachers' academic honesty in assigning grades. Even now, there are no checks on teachers to ensure the academic credibility of their grade assignments! (that they assign grades based on the students' competence and academic ability).
My solution plans to change that. When we complain that certain reforms fail to consider "root issues", we often forget that grade inflation itself is a root issue, and is nowhere far from #1 on that list (I personally consider the most important of the "root issues").
My solution is the first post in this thread, at http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=104494 . I warn you, there is quite a "flamed" discussion on this issue. (A warning, just in case).
(end of letter!)
-------------------------------------
Essentially, my solution involves just concrete parts:
1) Make the STAR test (i.e., the annual state-wide test every student takes at the end of the schoolyear) more difficult (in other words, raise content standards) and use it as a selective filter for passing students into next level courses.
For example, if you don't pass algebra but pass English, you don't advance to trigonometry, but you will advance to the next level English course. If anyone would be held back (however rarely that may happen), they would be held back in the appropriate course--NOT an entire grade level.
2) Just a portion of teachers' incomes will be based on how CLOSELY the final grades that teachers assign to their students MATCH the students' performance on the annual state exam.
This has nothing to do with how "well" students perform---only that they will be fairly graded.
The addition of this part does NOT reward teachers based on how "well" their students may perform. Nothing like that. RATHER---they are rewarded for CONSISTENCY in grading. In other words, rewards for a *consistency* between final course grades and student performance on the state exam. In a sense, this is -specifically- an anti-grade-inflation measure.
Again, *please* see http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=104494 for a more complete description of my reform plan.
I always got A's and B's in high school as well as college. I still got a shitty job with shitty wages. What do grades ultimately mean? Nothing. Relax, the sysem is rigged for the rich.
Entertaining discussion!
I am one of those mean teachers who required my students to rewrite on key curricular areas to ensure they showed me understanding. It was wonderful to have students ask me if they "passed", which meant 75%. They learned that just because you don't understand it the first time, you don't stop trying to learn if it's important.
What was especially interesting was the feedback from parents. I received an email and a letter (which I still keep)saying they were going to report me to my principal, saying that what I was doing was unfair.Unfair! I'm sorry I expect your child to learn and improve. I'm sorry that I'm teaching your child to try and try again to better themselves.
"Why should my child have to redo an assignment she gets 50% on? What happened to 50% being a passing mark?" were some of the questions I was asked in the letter. Congratulations- you've just taught your child to believe they're too stupid to achieve anything other than mediocrity.
Post a Comment