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.
The incentive is the same incentive we are all born with; that is, to get along with others and make life more bearable for yourself and others. Do you need to get paid to take care of your children or take care of your home? Is money the only thing that makes you get up in the morning? What about your appreciation of the arts and nature? Does someone have to pay you to paint, write, draw, sing a song or dance? What about take out the garbage? Does your wife pay you to take out the garbage or mow the lawn?
Under a communist system you might actually have to talk to neighbors and find out what needs to be done to improve the neighborhood… and you might have to do some it. OH MY!
“What happens in a society where everyone is supported and entitled but does not have to produce?” Produce what? Supported how? Entitled to what? All of your lame questions presume way to much. You should study history… you should look at your own family. Does everyone have a monetary motive to do everything in your home?
Does anything in your life not have a monetary determinant of value?
“Why should I work when I can just eat?” Eat what? Where are you going to get your food?
“All of your lame questions presume way to much.” Great answer is that part of your famous teaching method.
I have a degree in history and in art Kcdad so I have a pretty good appreciation for both.
I know you probablly think I just skated through college and just learned to spew information on tests or some other garbage response but hey whatever I have history to support my opinion you have some communist fantasy system that has never been proven to work.
I am very involved already in my neighborhood so I dont really need communism as an incentive I just take pride in where I live.
Your answers are the lame part of this dicussion. The def of communism states that the community provides for the needs of the individuals. I would assume that would mean food, housing, medical care but oh enlighten me great kcdad tell me what you think it means.
Eat what? Where are you going to get your food?
Well according to the definition of communism the rest of society will provide it to me along with my house and anything else I need to survive.
But Im sure in your very slanted view of civilization everyone just has the inherent desire to better society as a whole and would just live in harmony for the betterment of mankind. Do you think that some people are just lazy and could care less about their neighbors or their families or communities?
“Right, BooHoo. This is your first time on the site. Is it CJ?”
I never said this was my first time—-I believe I said “being new on this site”…Yep I scrolled up and that’s what I said.
Have I posted before-maybe twice…do I read without commenting, yes for about a month now.
I have a degree in history and in art… So tell me a country where capitalism has worked WITHOUT government controls, regulations, price and wage controls, anti-monopoly laws, SEC controls, FCC, FTC and other regulators controlling the “free market”?????????????
Who caused the Crash of 1928? Government or Business? Who caused last fall’s crash?
Who bailed the country out of recession and/or depression EVERY TIME?
Tell me how great capitalism is. Tell how well it worked for the Chinese laborers in the west, the blacks in the south,the Irish in the East… tell me about child labor and the 5 day work week. Tell me about minimum wages and overtime pay. Tell me about the Pullman strike or any of the miners’ strikes. “I could hire have the workers to kill the other half”…
Go ahead, Mr Art History major. Tell me all about how great capitalism is.
Tell me where labor fits into your capitalism… http://www.labor-studies.org/laborquotes.php
“The def of communism states that the community provides for the needs of the individuals.” You are a moron. Show us where you found THAT definition!
In Communism, individuals provide for the needs of the community. Contemplate the distinction.
“Well according to the definition of communism the rest of society will provide it to me along with my house and anything else I need to survive.” I’m waiting… show us where you got that definition…
History of Art
by Anthony F. Janson ??????
“Im sure in your very slanted view” MY slanted view??? At least I use real words with real definitions and don’t just make them up to suit my politics. (I also use apostrophes when appropriate)
“Do you think that some people are just lazy and could care less about their neighbors or their families or communities?”
No, I think some people are just lazy and could care less about words and their meanings.
“If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Five? No, calling a tail a leg don’t make it a leg.” – Abraham Lincoln
BooHoo. Puhleese… spare us the bovine fecal product. Do you expect us to believe…”after reading the conversation between him and intheknow, I now know why.” ???? That you have been reading this blog for awhile and only after that brief exchange you NOW understand????
“Perhaps therapy may help!” Try thinking for yourself and stop using more than one name in the same thread… it is annoying.
KC, the government can’t “bail out” anyone, it doesn’t create any significant economic value it only takes it from productive areas of society and transfers it. So it has nothing to bail anyone out with. Now you can continue on your pointless rant about communism in a post about D150 school registration.
Really… and commerce produces what? Goods and services that are bailed out with MONEY. Where does money come from.. ALL money comes from the government ( by way of the central bank. )
What business produces money?
Money doesn’t equal economic value. There is more to it than the paper that is printed. The goods and services have value the money is merely the way that we have all agreed to be the easiest way to transfer ownership of them. Ever heard of the barter system? If money itself were valuable then the government would never have to tax anyone it could just print it for whatever purpose it needed. However since, the value of the goods and services money can buy do not rise in value infinitely the constant printing of money only causes inflation. Maybe the reason you are such a communist it because you are completely clueless as to how economic systems really work…
Better tread cautiously, kc, you’re off the reservation.
“However since, the value of the goods and services money can buy do not rise in value infinitely”
Is that so? Who suggested it did? Great job building straw men, and not responding to my statement. What was the fix for the Great Depression and Chrysler 30 years ago? For the Savings and loans in the 80s? What was the fix for the banks, and other investment firms last fall? What is ALWAYS the fix? BRAND NEW SPANKING FRESH CASH!
I am not the one using money and value interchangeably in these discussions. That’s the Jim Stowells and other bean counters that worship the dollar.
nontimendum “Better tread cautiously”…??? Is that a threat? You gonna send the white man’s cavalry to put me in my place? Off the reservation… you bet your ass I am, I am seeing the real world, while you sit in your tent watching shadows dance across the dead animal skins.
Banks create money through their lending activities. It is known as the “velocity of money” and is one reason why the economy might stall again. The gov’t is attempting to inflate commerce through monetary and some fiscal stimulus, but velocity is stagnant No wonder most here have tired of certain ramblings.
kcdad googling phrase and will be self-professed expert in 5, 4, 3, 2, …………Enough!
“Republicans are for both the man and the dollar, but in case of conflict the man before the dollar.” Google that and ask yourself how the Republican Party could have strayed so far from this simple ideal.
No need to google voodoo. I understand velocity of money.. a dollar spent 15 times = $15.
A dollar loaned a .25% interest and then reloaned at 4 % interest and then reloaned again at 18% or 128% interest… that is called economic growth.
BUT where does all value come from? Either from the ground (nature) or from labor. Primary resources are the only source of value in the economy. Everything else is voodoo and mumbo jumbo.
“econ minor” Ha ha! what’s your major? Art History?
If money was able to “bail out” companies then why are we still in the middle of a recession KC? Are you the only one who is completely oblivious ( and thus not humored by the fact) that you are convinced you know everything even though you prove time and time again to be incredibly ignorant especially when it comes to economic matters? If you are such a fan of communism why don’t you move to Cuba or one of those nutty communal societies out in the forest somewhere?
Cuba isn’t communist… it is Socialist. “following enactment of the Socialist Constitution of 1976, the Republic of Cuba was defined as a socialist republic.”
Geesh. Why do I even bother trying to educate you?
How do you think recessions end? With an angel waving a magic wand and a female bear devouring all the bad, evil recessors? They are about money flow, and it takes awhile in a trickle down economic system for the new infusion of money to trickle down from the greedy bastards in the banks and corporations to the nobodies like you and me.
You probably already figured it out… if they wanted to truly stimulate this economy, they would have given the 1.5 trillion dollars to the people of this country… and average of about $45,000 per registered voter. You think that would have stimulated the economy… a little?
The stimulus wasn’t really about you and me (or the economy) was it?
🙂 Now I’m upset–you’ve all hyjacked the closest thing there is to a District 150 post–and buried my question about the District 150 grading policy proposal that may be presented to the BOE.
Who hijacked the post Sharon?
I would be upset too Sharon, every post KC participates in ends up in an intellectual pissing much so that he can attempt to prove (keyword being attempt) his superiority over everyone else in the discussion. But as well all know it all boils down to communism, if we had a communist society we wouldn’t have a problem with school registration I am sure KC would be willing to make that argument and connect all of the dots for us.
Not that upset–just joking! I was a teacher; it takes quite a bit to upset me.
Here is the DETOUR:
#
# in the knowon 29 Aug 2009
… Students need to learn that NOTHING is free, there is a pricetag on everything. An education however, is priceless!
Platitudes and nonsense need to be corrected before moving on… I did so. Then:
# Stephen Scanlan-Yerlyon 30 Aug 2009
You constantly attack capitalism as a system based in greed and self interest and state that a communist society is a better yet when questioned about said society you turn around and ask another question and state that its a teaching method?
WHERE DID THAT COME FROM?
I’m, not trying to prove anything other than some of you APPARENTLY don’t think before you spout off. (Cuba, communist… puh-leese.Capitalism is self regulating… wow!)
OK.. back on topic… the new grading policy proves that the “experts” in administration believe grades are meaningless and can just arbitrarily assign them as they please… as many teachers have known for years. ANYTHING to get in good with Federal money brokers.
Sharon… I was originally against this plan but I have been convinced. It would be a lenghty discussion so next time you are at Richwoods I would love to talk about this grading policy.
I am convinced that the reasoning behind this plan has merit to the point that I can support it.
Steve,
There are several of us that would be interested in your conversion.
Steve: I would be very interested in understanding how you see merit in this plan. I’ve watched from the beginning of my career until now as every semblance of accountability has been taken away from students. It will take considerable convincing to get me to the point where I understand this one. Of course, the previous plan that gave a 65 to suspended students–for doing nothing–was just as bad. These plans are fair only to the kids who do nothing. Of course, what I think is of little importance–however, I doubt that it will make much sense to most teachers. What the administration fails to understand is that teachers already make all sorts of concessions to give kids the benefit of the doubt–they just do not trust teachers to be fair. Sorry to disagree on this one, but I’ll try to keep a little piece of my mind open. 🙂
Ok… this will create a stir. Let’s see if people can engage in positive and progressive disagreement and discussion.
I agree that if this system simply make it easier to pass then it is a horrible decision, but I know how we will use it at RHS and I think that it will help many of our students grow.
The one point that sold me was that everyone against the plan (including me) was looking at the worst case scenario student. We only thought of the defiant, lazy student that simply won’t do any work and wants to work the system.
When schools make rules based on either these types of students or on the other extreme (the “perfect students”) they leave out the mass majority of those in the middle. The truth is that the student that routinely doesn’t turn work in will still fail in any truly objective based course with valid assessment and high expectations.
But we have a large number of our (PSD 150) students that go through a rough time in their lives and might miss one major assignment. The reality is that these types of students place themselves in a huge hole if given a zero. In many of our classes a zero on one major assignment can be extremely difficult to mathematically overcome. This makes students feel that they can not succeed and this leads many of them to give up. (increasing discipline… etc)
Please remember that in “the good old days” we would simply let most of these fail, advance them without knowledge, let them drop out in high school, place them in vocational programs as a means of dealing with them, etc. That isn’t the state of our current educational environment. We were not concerned with educating the disenfranchised in the past. It wasn’t as great as everyone thinks.
THE KEY TO MAKING THIS WORK… is that we insist that all students meet mandatory objectives. (We also fail in education when we allow hard working students to pass without gaining knowledge. Simply doing work isn’t enough to prepare students for success in life.) If we can take an unmotivated student, teach them about self-discipline and setting goals, get them to “turn it around”, and have them reach our standards then we should create a system that allows them to falter without failing. Please remember that we are here for kids and our job is not to simply sit in judgment.
At RHS I can promise that this system will NOT result in lowered expectation of our learning standards. We are initiating a program that will limit student participation in extra-curricular activities unless they show adequate academic progress (this includes attending sporting events and dances).
ok…. now I am going to hit submit and wait for the thunder to come….lol
Sharon… I read your post again…
I know that teachers make concessions as you state. I think that that happens far too often. If we create finals and major tests based on agreed upon objectives to create valid assessments of actual student knowledge then grading scales, “concessions”, etc become a thing of the past. In order to pass students will have to show a level of mastery of primary objectives.
If a teacher has a system that allows a student to do nothing for an extended period of time and still pass then I have concerns with his/her methods of instruction and assessment of student learning even with the 40% limit.
Steve: I’m sorry, Steve, but this is exactly what I meant by administration (definitely not you) not understanding that teachers already bend the heck out of grades so that one zero is never going to hurt a student. I already FOIAd Manual English grades–grades of a good many kids who are absent way too much and do not read at grade level. There were very, very few failures or even D’s. Teachers already know that they are “expected” to find ways to pass students–that too many F’s will get them in trouble. During the last several years of my career, I worked with a grade program that allowed me to drop the lowest grades. I frequently dropped one or two of the lowest homework grades. (Even before I had this program, I found ways). Actually, I was OK with that system because it helped every student. Students who regularly earned A’s were also helped by dropping a couple of B’s or C’s. This new system helps only those who don’t do the work–how could it be construed otherwise? I know that some teachers do not allow students to make-up late work. I had a compromise system (that was approved by administrators)–and I know that some teachers thought that it was too generous and it probably was. I gave kids up to 5 school days to turn in a homework assignment for 70% of the grade they actually earned–and I knew full well that some kids copied these assignments from other students because the papers usually had been passed back before the 5 days were up. However, the truth is that many students didn’t take advantage of this system and didn’t make up the assignments any way. Honestly, I wish that you hadn’t used the term “worst case scenario.” You just picked a phrase out of a hat–but it’s one that drove me crazy. I can’t tell you how many times I heard that phrase from our administrators. It was always “I don’t want to hear any worst case scenarios”–well, in my experience, they were more often the rule, not the exception. 🙂 Maybe Richwoods still fits your description of “We were not concerned with educating the disenfranchised in the past.” At least, that’s what the rest of us frequently thought. However, the rest of us have already created a system that allows kids “to falter without failing.” I just wish the central administration had more trust in their teachers. I remember the days of the unyielding, hard-nosed teachers that never gave kids a break–I haven’t seen one of those in years. I can tell you right now that it is the kids themselves who will think this system is crazy–and unfair. I have yet to figure out how it’s going to help the student who does an assignment and gets a 40 on it–and then realizes he would have gotten the same grade if he had done nothing–and kids will notice that. They have a basic sense of what’s fair and what isn’t.
I hate to see this system railroaded through (and what terrible timing to make the decision after school has already started) without looking at some of the “worst case scenarios.” I am willing to bet that no one has figured some sample grading situations. One suggestion that I have heard is to see how a student would fare if he did no homework for half the grading period and then turned in the work for the rest of the grading period. And please, please don’t say that that won’t happen with regularity–it already happens with the current system. Sorry, Steve, but I believe many teachers will be offended by “our job is not to simply sit in judgment.” Actually, it almost makes me want to cry because I know how much compassion District 150 teachers bring to their classrooms–I know how much I brought to mine.
Then there is “initiating a program that will limit student participation in extra-curricular activities unless they show adequate academic progress.” Did you know that the district held public meetings last year at Woodruff to discuss this plan? I believe Manual already instituted the plan. I was in a group with Jim Stowell, Hershel Hannah, Sandra Burke–I was very critical of the plan for all sorts of reasons–the biggest of which is that it is a horrendous bookkeeping choice. I could go on–but please remember that other schools don’t have all that many students who even participate in extra-curricular activities–it’s like pulling teeth to get kids to do anything other than play basketball. I’m still in awe of how many Richwods cheerleaders I saw at last Friday’s game. Oh, well, I’ve gone on enough. I’m sorry to be so opinionated on this subject, but I am. I doubt that I’m alone. I just hope that teachers have some say in this decision. However, it is my guess that 150 will be operating as usual without consulting teachers–or ignoring their opinions.
Sharon… before you go using the “we aren’t consulted” argument.. maybe some history on the creation of this plan needs to be stated. It doesn’t apply here. I came late to this grading decision. I was only asked to come to one meeting last spring after the grading committee had worked throughout the year. Many teachers were on the committee including many department heads. (This is what I have been told, if this is not true I want to know for future referrence.)
A little back history on this decision (as told to me last spring when this was first brought to my attention.) Many teachers in the district used the 5 point scale instead of percentages. In this scale a 5 is an A and a 1 is an F. A 0 in this system doesn’t ruin a students grade for the semester. With the development of family access the district wants to have a more consistent grading method for our parents.
This 40% was created as a compromise between teacher disagreement. It is an attempt to unite the 5 point scale and the percentage scale. 90 being the lower A relates to a 5. 60 is the lower D and is equivalent to a 1. With this many teachers then saw a 0 in the scale to be 50%. The compromise was that 50% was far too lenient so it was lowered to 40%.
In this development the problem in the past where it was better to be suspended instead of fail was also addressed. This oddity was brought by teachers.
There were plenty of teachers on the grading commitee. The decisions from this committee were brought to the meeting I sat in that changed my mind.
I have agreed to accept the committee’s result. We will have to adapt around the decision and adjust our assessment to ensure that the students meet our objectives. We will be able to do that.
You state that some teachers didn’t allow them to make up work and you imply that some thought you were too lenient. We need a consistent system.
When I taught at Cahokia and was fighting to add AP to our curriculum and to have our top students take honors biology as freshmen I had to fight the worst-case scenario mentality. There are plenty of teachers that agree that others get caught up in that scenario. This is not simply an administrator thing, but that is the easy card to play when disagreements exist. Especially in the current climate.
From what I have seen (I came late to the grading issue) this included teacher input so while I agree that often teachers in this district don’t have enough say in matters, they did in this one.
Steve, I realize I was a bit hard on you. I just want you to understand that I started teaching in 1962 at Roosevelt Jr. High–which had a 98% black population–all before integration began in Peoria. All my students were disenfranchised. They helped me see the world through their eyes–and it was a far different world than today’s. I could write a book about all that those young people taught me. There were only two junior highs in Peoria (7th through 9th grade)–Trewyn was all white; Roosevelt all black. Roosevelt was a bit of a “holding place” for black students–most of whom didn’t make it to Manual; they dropped out before they went to high school. Then came integration and I moved with my students in 1969 to integrate with Trewyn’s students as the first 9th grade at Manual. We call those the “riot years.” A few weeks ago I went to the reunion of the class of 1974–one of the first classes to be racially integrated at Manual. All those memories. Of course, the other thing you have to understand is that Richwoods (not a 150 school) had been built as an escape from the integration that was hovering on the horizon just before the 1960s. Then Richwoods was forced into District 150 and forced to integrate. There were some fairly unpleasant days–and the rest of us had an attitude about Richwoods and vice versa. I’m not certain that any of that helps with the grade policy discussion except that I want you to understand my reaction to your “Please remember that in “the good old days” we would simply let most of these fail, advance them without knowledge, let them drop out in high school, place them in vocational programs as a means of dealing with them, etc. That isn’t the state of our current educational environment. We were not concerned with educating the disenfranchised in the past. It wasn’t as great as everyone thinks.” For me that era was the one into which I walked as a new teacher in 1962–and then it became my mission in life to do everything in my power to see to it that those children who crossed my path would not be dumped anywhere or disenfranchised. That’s why I don’t want anyone to misinterpret my objections (or that of any of my colleagues who have shared that mission with me) to this grade policy as a desire to discourage kids or to fail them–quite the opposite. In all honesty, Richwoods today might still be in a significantly different place–there is no doubt that there is still a difference in its demographics compared to the other three 150 schools. In fact, I can almost see that your reasons for favoring the new grade policy might be legitimate for your school but not for the other three.
Also if you polled my staff they are in overwhelming support of the student accountability plan. So I do have my teachers support.
Now we’re getting somewhere–see these blogs do open an important avenue of communication. I do hate to go on and on but about 10 to 15 years ago I wrote a rather lengthy “memo” to the administration about the problems that you just described with regard to the 5 point scale versus percentage grades–almost identical to what you just wrote (I still may have it on my computer). I do believe I was ignored. I had a personal experience in our building that proved that allowing teachers to choose which system to use had created a very inconsistent grading system–and I do favor percentage grades for the grading period. Previously–just before my time–semester averages were also figured on the 0 to 100 scale; that system really made it difficult for students to pass. I do favor the 5 pt scale to figure semester averages.
Now that you have given me that bit of history, I, at least, understand why this grading policy was suggested–as a compromise between the two methods of grading. Of course, I do not believe the 5 pt system should ever have been used–I did much experimenting with that system versus the percentage system and it was nearly impossible for a student to fail. There is just nothing fair about a 0F being equal to a 60 or 69 F (or even a 40).
I am surprised to hear that teachers have been involved in this discussion since last spring–not saying it didn’t happen–just curious to know how many teachers actually knew about the committee. I would assume that department heads would have consulted with teachers in their buildings, etc.
I certainly agree about consistency being important with regard to make-up work, etc. I spoke out on that issue often enough. OK we have reached much more agreement now. One suggestion I would have is that the plan should be evaluated at the end of the year–and some attention be given to the worst case scenarios to see if they occur more often than you might expect–the cases where students really do play the system. I do love how I take myself so seriously–as though anything I say should even matter as I sit at home enjoying my retirement and staying up way too late writing on blogs.
Thanks for the discussion Sharon and Steve. This has been helpful.
One more point of clarification: I don’t know much about the 5 pt system–only the 4 pt system with F being 0. I would have to be enllightened as to how F would become a 1–hopefully, not in figuring semester averages where, according to 150’s policy, 2 D’s and 2 F’s have to equal D. Also, I don’t think rules about make-up, etc., should be too rigid–teachers should be allowed some discretion–and some trust.
Thanks, Kcdad–I felt like I was hyjacking the blog again.
Personally I think the “objectives” slant to grading is a mistake. If a kid comes into class knowing everything and gets a 98 on all of his tests… or even better, he get 89s on all over his tests, and another kid comes into the class completely ignorant and clueless, studies his ass off and gets an 89… do they both deserve a B? Do they both deserve an A?
What is it we are trying to do in school? What purpose does grades serve the students? (something is grammatically wrong with that question but I have bee staring at it for awhile and can’t figure it out)
Kcdad: Totally agree about the objectives–we already have too much of that with NCLB. I didn’t want to go off on that tangent–but since you brought it up. I’m still not convinced that the 40 being the new zero is a good idea. I understand the compromise between the two grading systems–but 10 years from now, no one will understand why that compromise was needed. Your sentence, maybe:
“grades do, not does” and “For what purpose do grades serve the students?” 🙂
… CJ – how about a delete option?
Emerge: Did I come off as agreeing with Steve? I meant to convey that I understood how this new plan could be considered a compromise between the two grading systems currently operating in 150: the 4 pt scale and percentage grades (teachers currently have a choice which to use). I applaud any effort to get rid of this dual system–which creates considerable inconsistency. However, I do not believe making a zero a 40 is the solution. First of all, it’s unfair–it helps only those who do not do their work. It is of no help to the student who does the work but “earns” a grade above 40–especially, those students who get grades between 40 and 60. I believe that my practice of dropping one or two of the lowest homework grades for all students was a better solution–everyone was helped–it was fair and served the same purpose and didn’t give students the idea that they could get a grade without doing any work. Also, I have no objection to the proposed grading scale–especially, I am fine with changing the F range from 0-60 instead of 0 to 69. I believe colleges already have that grade scale.
Emerge: I wasn’t offended by your original question–you have a right to ask that–Sharon has a right to ask that question.
Steve: In case you return to the blog. Your “In this development the problem in the past where it was better to be suspended instead of fail was also addressed. This oddity was brought by teachers. ” Have you read this insane policy? I managed to succeed at ignoring this crazy policy. A suspended student was supposed to receive either a 0 (for those who used letter grades) or a 65 (for those of us who used percentages) on all assignments missed during a suspension. If memory serves me correctly and if I were told correctly, this policy was instituted because a Richwoods honor student was suspended for three days. Zeroes would have ruined his/her chances to be in the Top 10 (or maybe valedictorian); his/her parents complained and the policy was changed to one that none of us could ever understand. We were supposed to record grades in two separate ways for all suspended students (I’ve read the policy over and over and never could figure out what we were asked to do). That’s when I instituted my own policy that everybody could make up late work–to be done within 5 school days at 70% credit–that’s how I got around the policy and no one ever questioned me. Not completely true–the policy was “suggested” once when an athlete in my class was suspended–and needed the 65s to stay eligible. Also, to clarify what you may have misconstrued about my comment that we all made concessions. For my part, any benefit of the doubt that I gave to one student, I gave to all students. I gave every student a grade sheet every Monday (for the years after computers–and I was one of the first teachers to record grades on a computer). In fact, it became amusing because students wanted in my class just because of the grade sheets–they always knew where they stood and could see what they needed to do to improve their grades. I was always fair about grades, but passing out grade sheets made it impossible to play games with an individual’s grade. I would assume that Skyward forces that kind of consistency.
150 Grading Policy: I did get in touch with a teacher who was on the grading committee–he gave me a bit of info on the phone and I’ll e-mail for more, if needed. First of all, the committee met only in the 2007-08 school year about five times but did not meet at all in 2008-09. Mostly, they came to some agreement with regard to changing the scale for A from 93 to 100 to 90 to 100 and so forth. There was some discussion about 40 replacing 0. According to this teacher, no consensus was ever reached or even asked for with regard to 40 being the new zero. He maintains that he believes the majority of teachers were definitely against it. (And if the district can’t produce a vote count, then that definitely should prove no vote was taken). Consensus being the buzz word that doesn’t really call for a vote. As an aside, he stated that the teachers who were in favor of the 40 may have been the same ones who were against giving any homework to students on the grounds that they wouldn’t do it anyway, so they would just be set up for failure if asked to do homework.
Doesn’t it seem strange that teachers are now being quoted as favoring a plan that hasn’t even been discussed by them for a whole school year? Now to the present. Evidently, an administrator from Wisconsin Avenue has been in charge of some meetings where he has stated that the 40 was an idea favored by this committee–and teachers have challenged his statement during the meeting(s). This sounds like a very familiar scenario to me–and to those of us who have been around for a while in District 150. Consult the teachers so that the real decision-makers can say that teachers have been consulted; let them feel as though they might be part of a decision-making committee (works with new teachers); then ignore their opinions (or quote the ones–often the minority–that agree with the administration) and convince the public and the BOE that teachers are behind the idea. That’s the way it went with the Wacky Wednesday decision and the decision to continue Wacky Wednesdays–and only 22 teachers even received the questionnaires on which to voice their opinions.
From rereading Steve’s earlier posts, I think I may have come to a wrong conclusion. It’s possible that teachers will still be allowed to use the letter grade system instead of the percentage system–I personally think that’s unfortunate.
Also, isn’t everyone forgetting something–as usual. None of this can happen without a vote–the vote of the Board of Education. Hopefully, they will be willing to hear what teachers really think. Holding my breath!
Steve’s “There were plenty of teachers on the grading commitee. The decisions from this committee were brought to the meeting I sat in that changed my mind. I have agreed to accept the committee’s result.” Jumping to a logical conclusion–doesn’t it seem, Steve, that you may have been led to believe that this was a decision of the committee when, in fact, no formal decision was ever called for or made by teachers on any committee? As a newcomer, you certainly shouldn’t be expected to question what you are told officially–that’s not on you.
kc.. some are using their own 5 point system for their classrooms. In this system completing the work but failing is worth 1 point and not doing the work at all is worth 0. I have never heard of this before coming to Peoria, but I can see its merits.
I have been in many different schools with many different grading systems. Heck at U of I we regularly had science courses curved so that a 42% out of 100% was an A. (This opens up the possiblity of finding someone truly brilliant that scores a 90% when everyone else is in the 30s. This is a great system for an intense program such as U of I engineering.)
People severly overestimate the impact that a grading system has on a good teacher. Good teachers can overcome the failings in any system (and they all have them).
I am not a strong “supporter” of this system or of any other. I can see its merits and the most important thing is that we reach a compromise so our parents that view grades online will understand what is happening in their sons and daughters classrooms.
I can support this system because I believe in the ability of my staff to adapt and overcome its weaknesses.
Side note…. I left for school and expected to be blasted when I came home to read this blog. Thanks to everyone for having a good discussion.
Also… I spoke with a teacher that was on the grading committee. It doesn’t seem that the committee itself could ever fully reach a final agreement, but the administrator meeting that I attended included the suggestions from the grading committee.
I don’t remember exactly what we altered, but I do know that it ended up similiar to the suggestions. In short, teacher input was taken into consideration.
Steve–The teacher who gave me my info just read what I put on the blog and he said that the number 40 was actually never mentioned in the committee–he has no idea where that number came from–so I really don’t believe that that particular suggestion came from the committee–and it is the only one about which teachers are complaining. The truth of the matter is that the administration and BOE are not, in any way, obligated to seek or follow the desires of teachers. I think the district would be run better if the people closest to the situation–the ones who have to make everything work–were part of the decision-making process. However, it is dishonest for the central administration to make people believe that this is a teacher decision when it isn’t. Of course, I am still curious to find out what the board will do–because this isn’t a done deal until they vote. I agree that it is important to have a consistent system now that parents have access to grades through Skyward. I found that making my grades available to parents and students every week via computer-generated grade sheets cut out complaints about grades, etc. I rarely, if ever, had any complaints about grades–except from parents whose children had withheld the grade sheets–once they knew about the grade sheets, there were no more complaints.
You’re right teachers always find ways to overcome the weaknesses of the system–but they shouldn’t have to do so.
I think I understand the need for this system, the way things currently are… but do you see the problem with a teacher or a test that “admits” that a “truly brilliant” student can only achieve a 90? Isn’t the problem here the whole fallacy of testing?
I totally agree a student should receive “credit” for trying, for tackling the subject matter. I have structured my classes in such a way that I don’t need to test my students. I present the information and concepts in PERSONAL, MEANINGFUL ways that forces the student to either address them or ignore them. If they ignore them they do so because they aren’t interested in Sociology, Psychology, Politics, Economics, Religion, Race and Ethnicity, Sexuality, human beings or life in general. I find there are very few students in my classes that are bored, unchallenged or unwilling to think and investigate these ideas are their own; outside of class and even after the course is over.
They may not know how to spell Freud or Durkheim, Aristotle or Locke, or tell you where or when they were born, but I guarantee they will be able to tell you 3 different ways to look at the same question.
If a student wants to sleep through my class… why should I care? How is that my problem? Why should that student be punished for not being interested in what I, the school and the accreditation committee thinks is important? I’ll bet he/she is interested in some things that I find boring and unimportant, too.
Kcdad: I’m not clear as to what you mean here, “I think I understand the need for this system, the way things currently are… but do you see the problem with a teacher or a test that “admits” that a “truly brilliant” student can only achieve a 90? Isn’t the problem here the whole fallacy of testing?” To what system are you referring? Also, I’m not sure I understand why a student can’t get a 100–why would 90 be the ceiling? I totally agree that students need encouragement for trying –and I think most high school teachers that I know do that. That’s my whole problem with the 40 being zero–that’s giving credit to students who do not try at all–and the proposed system gives no boost at all to the kids who do try. We’ve had this discussion before–you teach at the college level where I do believe students should be enrolled in courses that interest them or will be helpful to whatever future they are planning. However, from kindergarten through high school, young people need to be exposed to as many subject areas as possible so that they can develop interests that they might not know they have.
Grades. Grades are useless. THAT is my point.
The 90 was a reference to Steve’s earlier post. He used that number to indicate that even a truly brilliant student might only get a 90 on a test when everyone else was failing….
“However, from kindergarten through high school, young people need to be exposed to as many subject areas as possible so that they can develop interests that they might not know they have.”
I agree with this, they should be exposed and are. What I disagree with is that they need to be trained in these areas BEFORE they are interested in them. There is no purpose trying to teach reading or arithmetic to someone who isn’t interested in reading or numbers. IT IS A WASTE OF TIME AND A WASTE OF THE CHILD”S NATURAL INCLINATION TO BE CURIOUS AND WANT TO LEARN.
OK–I spend time with a 3, 4, and 6-year old. I’ve never worked with that age group before. I am amazed by the developmental stages–and children really do provide hints as to when they are ready to learn their alphabet, numbers, etc. Of course, materials that stimulate those desires have to be provided–and with three of them, the oldest stimulates the other two to learn. I have a 7-year-old cousin who goes to Peoria Academy. He has been asked to do more difficult math than 150 would have required, but he has kept up and enjoys it. However, I know of two kids who were at a Montessori school where they supposedly teach when the kids are ready. These two ended up being behind–but are now flourishing at Peoria Christian. On the other hand, I had a math teacher in the early grades that thought I had a “natural” proclivity for math–something must have happened after that because the interest never progressed.
As for your opinion that grades are useless, I don’t know how to argue for or against that. I was fortunate–I was never particulary worried about grades. I recall receiving a couple of C’s in college from teachers that were super hard–however, I recognized that I learned more in those classes than I did in some of the easy A classes–I accepted the knowledge as being more important than the grade. The idea of Glasser’s Schools Without Failure didn’t seem to take off. I don’t think there is any chance of doing away with grades, so teachers just have to work with the system. I know that I often gave my students speeches about their grades in my class, telling them that the grades were just an assessment of their work–not an assessment of their worth as individuals. I do believe that students often equate their self-worth with grades–and that is the bad thing about grades.
Steve:
Although Sharon and I don’t always see eye to eye, we are more often than not on the same page. I have to side with her, that I simply don’t get a skewed grading system as discussed above. It seems if there is a difficult situation in a student’s life that caused them to not complete an assignment it should be at the teacher’s discretion to make adjustments accordingly, i.e. turn the assignment in late with deductions, etc. But to create a distorted grading system just seems wrong.
On a related matter, could you please explain to me again the problem with the current grading system as it relates to class rank. I met with you this Summer and you gave me the example of a student that had a taken honors and/or AP classes but her class rank was not what you would have expected, or something to that effect. I thought I understood at the time the problem but . . . I need you to refresh my recollection.
Are honors/AP classes not weighted to compensate for the difficulty of the class?
Frustrated: I have been waiting patiently for you to “weigh” in on this subject–I was fairly sure I would have an ally–actually, we have many allies but they are all too busy teaching to spend time on the blogs. Jim Stowell brought the subject of weighted grades up to me not long ago. I almost got the impression that grades were no longer weighted in 150. I remember the arguments when they were instituted under Dr. Strand. It is quite possible that grades are no longer weighted–but they certainly should be. However–and I hate to use Manual as an example again–but the principal has arbitrarily labeled about 96 out of 140 sophomores as “enriched.” I certainly would object if their grades were weighted–to be any higher than they already are.
First…. I can not state that the exact number 40 was brought by the grading committee. But I have spoken with teachers that were on the committee and there was a sentiment that a 0 on a 100 scale was killing the motivation in many students. Somewhere along the line the 40 was developed in an attempt to answer concerns brought by teachers. Sharon, teacher input was taken. I do know some teachers that voiced a 50 in place of a 0 as I listed above.
I shouldn’t have entered this converstation in the manner that I did because I was only in one meeting on this issue. I am honestly not on a “side” with this grading scale and I apologize for appearing so. I have always played devil’s advocate when discussions on grading scales occur. My main reason for entering was to attempt to show that this system has some merit… just as any system does. How grading is applied in the classroom regardless of design ultimately allows teacher subjectivity. This decision is not the “end of the world” that I felt many are jumping to.
With the major grading problems of our class ranking and the lack of weighted grades in our system the 40 percent rule isn’t a “mountain worth dying for”.
Frustrated… we do not have weighted grades for GPA. We calculate class rank with a point system. Some enriched classes are worth more points.
This results in some odd situations where a student with what appears as merely an above average GPA has an outstanding class rank.
Now I am going to step away from this forum. As I have stated before, if anyone wants to speak in person please contact me at RHS. (693-4414)
Steve: I don’t expect you to respond to any of my ramblings–you don’t need to put yourself in that position. We will all be sorry if you feel you have to step away from this forum–I was the one that kept telling you that you might not want to be so open; however, I hoped you wouldn’t step away–still understand though. I’m sure 150 is none too happy that this has become a topic of conversation–that teachers began talking “out of school,” so to speak. A desire for transparency has not taken hold. You probably know that I’m not convinced as to the number of teachers who were pro and con the new system–that there were teachers on both sides I have no doubt. I firmly believe that the 40 was only a topic of conversation, not an attempt to make a decision. I’m curious as to the source of the results of this committee that met in 2007-08 and not at all last year–are there written notes or just recollections? There is probably a good reason why you don’t know anything for sure. I don’t believe that the 0 to 100 scale is killing the motivation of students. I do believe that the literacy problem might be killing not just their motivation but their ability to do the work. I keep using Manual as the example because I know more about Manual and have FOIAd information. Manual students don’t appear to be hurting from whatever grade scale is being used–because the failure rate is very low–at least, for the 2nd semester English grades that I FOIAd–and English usually has the most failures. Of course, I believe Manual grades are inflated. My grades were inflated, too–but not as inflated as the ones I’m seeing at Manual now. Changing the grading scale is not going to solve any problems–except that the graduation rate might be higher. However, the NCLB scores will be as low and lower than ever–that grade scale will not be changing. As usual, District 150 is going for the wrong solution to a real problem. No, the change won’t be the end of the world. I will continue to maintain my greatest objection to the system–it isn’t fair. The kids who do no work are the only ones who benefit. A student who “earns” a 41 to 60 will not get any help (no one from 41 to 100 will get any help). Students will not learn any more or less because of this grading system or any other.
The ending of weighted grades slipped up on me–I have no idea when that change came. I know that Dr. Strand instituted them. Lack of weighted grades should certainly be a blow to the IB program at Richwoods–how very unfair to those kids. District 150 doesn’t seem to consider how the public and parents will feel about these changes. (They mistakingly believe that parents want school to be easier for their kids). There are a significant number of parents who want their children to be challenged–who do not want to see grades inflated any more than they already are and material watered down any more than it already is. The parents of students who will excel no matter what the grading scale will be the ones who will take their students out of 150 to a school where their children will be challenged. District 150 can’t afford to keep losing students–and they keep making decisions that cause more people to leave. Did I mention how glad I am that I am retired–I couldn’t take the strain of all this turmoil? The worst part of this grading decision is that the district couldn’t get its act together enough to make the decision at the end of last year so that it would have been in place for the start of the school year–never plan ahead seems to be the plan.