Today is registration day at District 150 schools. I know this because we’ve gotten three automated calls from District 150 (the last one coming in at 8 a.m.), plus multiple mailed notices. If anyone claims they didn’t know registration day was today, they either don’t have a phone or mail service, or they’re just not very attentive.
I had to come back to update this topic.
The news came out today that the grading scale will include a 0 for those that do not attempt the work.
Once the new policy is out most should be happy but as in all discussions regarding grading scales that I have seen in any district…. the weaknesses of any scale will be highlighted by others.
I am happy with the new policy… I can be happy with many grading scales. My point was that we can adapt regardless of the policy.
I am happy that we will have a consistent policy for our parents.
Sharon and Frustrated should be happy with the new policy.
It will be given to the teachers tomorrow.
One last note, Sharon the committee that I met with did take the teachers suggestions in serious consideration. There were two different camps regarding the lowest score possible. The committee came up with the 40% but it was intended to answer both sides concerns. Believe it or not.. that is your choice. In the end the final group in the admin building decided to truly honor what the teachers came up with.
In this issue the teachers had a voice.
Steve: Thanks for the update. Before I get into my comments about the grade policy, I would like to say that I hope everyone realizes that that this whole controversy points out the real problem in District 150–the one that will continue to be ignored. If there are so many kids in 150 who cannot do the work expected at grade level, we should be asking why and seeking a solution to that problem. District 150 has a significant literacy problem–Martha Ross has brought it up on many occasions. If that problem cannot be resolved–and I have no idea how to assess the reasons for the problem, which, of course, begins in the early grades and compounds each year, culminating in the fact that a significant number of high school students do not read above the 6th grade level. All the District’s efforts should be focused on this major problem. Like it or not, many District 150 students (as has always been the case) will not go to college at all and many others will not make the decision for post high school work until much later. The District is doing nothing for them but providing them with watered-down academics–and the discouragement that you have discussed that they experience because they cannot do the work or do not want to do the work.
One big, big question–when does the policy go to the board; don’t they still have to vote on changes in grade policy? How can the policy go to the teachers tomorrow? Bewildered! I still have some questions–curiosity only, since I don’t have to deal with this problem. Do teachers still have a choice between the 4 pt. scale and the 0-100 percentage scale? If students who don’t do the work get a 0, who gets the 40–I assume students who earn a grade from 1 to 39? I still want to know how does this help anyone who earns a grade from 41 up? It seems that the kids who earn a 41 to a 59 will still get an F, although with percentage grades the higher numbers will average in better than a 0.
There are two things that I find good about the policy, in general. I think that the breaks at 60, 70, 80, and 90 are much better than the 70-76; 77-84; 85-92, and 93 -100. Also, getting rid of the policy that gave a 65 to suspended students is long overdue. Of course, I still have questions about the decision of the original committee–the one that met in 2007-2008. You say there were two camps regarding what number to use for the lowest possible score. I still believe there were three camps–and the third, I believe, was ignored. I have considerable trust in the teacher to whom I spoke–the one who was on the committee. He says the committee never came up with or agreed to the 40% idea. Still bewildered. Also, I do know that some speaker came to the district from the Univeristy of Virginia–at least, to Manual teachers and that he is the one who presented this idea of 40% as the lowest score–my guess is that he is the point of origin.
Steve, I just picked this comment up on Laura’s blog:
From a teacher who says, “I, too, was on the grading committee that was headed by Dr. Simpson. We made a recommendation to Mr. Hinton in 2008. That recommendation did not include 40 as the lowest grade. We also researched what other school districts in the area were using as a grading scale and felt like if we used 90-100, it would be lowering the standard.”
I know this is not the teacher than I consulted. I believe I am going to continue to believe that the above statement is the truth.
Steve:
Thank you for clarifying the GPA/Class rank issue.
“that a 0 on a 100 scale was killing the motivation in many students.”
Isn’t this the real problem? Motivating students? We want them to get good grades and threaten them with low paying jobs if they don’t get BETTER grades. Why don’t we just put the money into the system and pay them?
If you want to economically motivate people? MONEY is the answer.
If you want to intellectually motivate people, IDEAS are the answer.
There will be a District-Watch meeting at Godfather’s at 6 p.m. on Sunday, Sept. 6. Terry realizes that many will probably be busy because of the holiday but will still be there to meet with those who are free. It will be interesting to see what’s on the agenda for the BOE meeting (should be posted today). Jon and kcdad, if you both show up again, I’m sorry I will miss your getting to know each other in person.
I would rather be at the meeting, but, alas, I will be spending the weekend with the in-laws.
As Steve had said, teachers did receive the new grade policy today. The plan does not identify who issued it—no names on it. The teachers’ committee is not mentioned as having been consulted or as having been a part of the decision-making process (that’s good because they weren’t). What is bound to upset most teachers and should outrage the public is a provision that was certainly not expected. Students with unexcused absences are to be allowed to make-up work for full credit (homework, tests, etc.). Now there are absolutely no academic consequences for being suspended or gypping school. In fact, there is a definite advantage. Can anyone see an advantage of taking a test later than the other students take it? Do you think the “absent” student might get the advantage of finding out the content of the test from other students? This policy was touted as a way to eliminate the old ridiculous policy that stated that suspended students were to get a 65F on work missed. Now, that old policy has been replaced with a worse one that offers the student the possibility of earning 100A. Grade policy must be board-approved. In fact, as with any change in policy, there has to be a first and second reading at the BOE meetings before the board can actually vote on the change. Do you think there is a possibility that Hinton has already taken an “informal” vote or conducted a bit of a poll to see how the board will vote? Does anyone think that such communication might be illegal? Otherwise, can anyone explain why the teachers are now being told to refigure all grades on all assignments given since school started and to post them on Skyward—even though the board has not voted yet? (Retraction: I haven’t been told that teachers were told to start using the policy–I am just assuming so, otherwise why would they have been given the policy. I’ll have to check out my assumption). In fact, have board members even seen a copy of the new policy. It probably won’t happen, but what if the board votes against the policy—then teachers would have to refigure and repost grades—that could make for many parental complaints.
Good news from 150–thanks to union action, I believe–on Tuesday’s agenda:
SUSPENDED INCREASE IN CLASS SIZE
Proposed Action: That effective September 8, 2009 the Action Item issued on April 20, 2009, to increase class size by three students, is suspended.
There is no mention of a grade policy on the agenda–I wish someone could explain why the board isn’t voting on what seems to be a major change in grade policy.
I did recevie an e-mail from a teacher that does say that the 40% grade proposal was discussed at length at the teachers’ grade policy committee meetings. However, I still believe I am correct in saying that it was discussed (and, of course, there were teachers in favor), but that it wasn’t part of a final proposal from the teachers.
Old News–about grading policy, but I wanted to clarify. I stated earlier that a teacher had told me that the 40 as the new zero was not discussed at the original teachers’ meetings. I misunderstood that part of his statement. To my knowledge–I believe everyone agrees that it was discussed–the extent to which it was or was not discussed might not be as clear since the committee has not met since 2007-2008, so it’s all a matter of memory. I also believe that everyone agrees that no vote was ever taken and no recommendation to change zero to 40 was ever communicated to the board by the committee. I believe that the administration has or would claim that teachers were in favor of the proposal. The question, of course, is whether or not that would be a minority or a majority of teachers–no one can answer that question because a vote was not taken–and no concensus was reached. The fact still remains that the board of education has not yet been asked to vote publicly on the change in policy.