A philosophical question.

[Braedley]

The point is that despite the fact that I didn't know everything on the test does not preclude the fact that it was an unfair test. Why should the entire class be penalized for something that the prof screwed up on in the first place. Since there isn't any other class for this course this year (or any other year), then you don't have to worry about comparing my mark to someone who didn't have the same prof or exam. Also, it's standard policy to give the same exam, with the same weighting (both for each question, and for the term mark overall), and even the same assignments for courses with many sections, so if scaling is needed, all the profs must decide how it's going to be applied, and how large it will be. Also, you don't seem to realize that the person how is actually teaching the course has a huge impact on the performances of their students. For instance, I had what I considered a very crappy teacher for intro physics. I have been told that when held up to the prof that taught the course previously, the prof I had would look like the best prof in the world.

I have an understanding of what the course is about, I can work through the theory and problems. However, and I cannot state this strongly enough, the test I was given was not a fair test of my abilities, or the abilities of the class as a whole. You seem to have gotten the notion into your head that it is entirely my fault that I, and the rest of my class, did poorly on said test.

[Keevan_Colton]

Read the three options I listed...if the entire class is flunking the test then there is a problem that using a curve doesnt solve...it just hides.

[Braedley]

The entire class wouldn't have flunked the test if a fair test was given!!! A way of fixing this is to adjust the marks such that they are representative of the marks that would have appeared if the test were fair.

Is the problem that the prof just gave an unfair test? Cause if it is, then why are you advocating that the stundents be unfairly penalized?

[KeVinK]

Mr. Colton, we seem to be talking cross purposes. I'm sure the fault is mine.

Certainly there are times when egg sorting is necessary. Criteria based competency testing is of course needed for issuing driver's licenses or neurosurgery credentials. Personally I think only people who can pass very strict competency tests should be allowed to handle important jobs like holding public office or parenting.

My point, which I'm evidently not expressing well, is that grading and testing have nothing to do with education. They are -- in the ideal -- a measure of whether or not education has taken place. However, focusing on the test too early in the process produces learners who do well parroting information but are incapable of independent thought or personal initiative.

Mastery-based education does not advance a student beyond a level until that student can consistently demonstrate mastery of the skills that level requires. This is unpopular with people who like numbers to point to. High school should be four grades, each taking a year, ten percent of those who enter should be labeled gifted by the time they graduate, twenty percent should be in shop/trade classes, twenty percent should drop out, and fifty percent should do at least well enough to get into the community college. In the mastery model, the learner would be able to take as few as three or as many as six years to complete the course of study with no particular merit or onus being attached to either choice. (As an employer, I'd look out for those six-year folks. They've already demonstrated determination and a willingness to do hard work.)

The current administrations "No Child Left Behind" program links a child's grade to their age rather than their ability. It is the responsibility of the schools to advance the children by age. HOWEVER to "prove" this is working, the schools must show the children have passed year-end tests. The last month of each school year is devoted to EXCLUSIVELY teaching what is on the test. This is madness. This is the result of placing the dispensing of grades above education.

In the example given I would not have graded. I would have explained to student A that while she had produced a product that met all the criteria, she did not do the work she was capable of. I would then have assigned her an independent research project that would stretch her abilities. I would have commended student B for his effort, praising specific valid improvements he had made over earlier efforts. I then would have either provided additional instruction or -- more likely -- hooked him up with a peer support/study group.

I did not say, nor do I believe, testing does not have a valid and valuable place. Indeed, competency testing is a vital step in demonstrating mastery of a skill. However, the proper place for this important rite of passage is at the end of the process.

[Darth Wong]

Student B, because s/he completed the exercise.

So did Student A.

Then again, I'm a retired teacher who spent a decade or so working with at risk students. (And every one of us in the business hates mvies like "Dangerous Minds" which makes it look like one teacher can overcome a lifetime of neglect and abuse by taking the time to listen to the kids one time.)

The purpose of an education is to develop the self-discipline and habits of thought that will enable you to continue to learn and through continued learning adapt to and master the challenges "real life" throws at you. The end product is relevant only in whether or not it indicates the learner understood the instructions.

And Student A has fully grasped the "lifelong learning" concept since he already knows the subject matter, so he must have read about it in his spare time or been extremely attentive during class (or both). How on Earth does this mean you should penalize him?

Student B fulfilled the purpose of the assignment. Stretch the boundaries of what s/he could do, go beyond what s/he already knew to gain and apply new knowledge. That s/he did not do it perfectly is not the point -- school is a learning environment. The skill will be mastered through repitition, with each trial approximating the desired skill more closely until it is mastered. Student B -- properly encouraged, reinforced and instructed -- will continue to develop and grow. Outside the academic environment, the skill learn will be generalized increasing the chances of her/him "landing on their feet" in whatever circumstance life throws at them.

That's a really long-winded way of saying that Student B gets a handicap, because Student A clearly learned all he needed to learn in order to do the assignment somehow, and his work was superior.

Student A demonstrated very poor adaptive and/or learning skills. As long as s/he already knows a topic, s/he will be fine. But the minute a challenge comes along -- something that involves self-discipline and work to master -- this person will fail. The literate and intellingent barista discussing Proust while dispensing coffee at 30 and dreaming of what life could have been like if only the world were wise enough to recognize her/his true worth. The bitter telemarketer able to deliniate the social and political structure of Rome over its entire history but not successfully amintain a marriage. Salespersons at a dozen retail outlets -- or worse travelling -- with no goal or purpose to life beyond a certainty they had been destined for better things. All of these people were Student A types. No doubt their SAT scores were in the upper ten percent.

Ah yes, and giving them failing grades for superior work would have completely solved this problem, right? Gifted underachievers get that way because the school system fails so utterly to challenge them, not because they got good grades for superior work.

The problem with focusing on the product rather than the process is it handicaps the learner. Programs like "No Child Left Behind" which require instructors to train learners to repeat rote answers whether or not they comprehend what they are regurgitating have more to do with training parrots than educating individuals. Mastery-based education, not outcome-based grading is the key to developing the intellignece -- even the wisdom -- to make knowledge worthwhile.

Equating outcome-based assessment with cheesy multiple-choice exams is a completely misleading argument. You propose to dismiss the idea through "guilt by association".

[ImpishAngel]

I pick student B for a few reasons-

1) All teachers grade based on personal preference when handing out extra points- no doubt.

2) While student A may have done it, and still had it in on-time, he didn't give it everything he had. Student B, not quite grasping it, still tried, and gave it everything he had, and it should count for something, otherwise the kid will grow up thinking that he doesn't have to work as hard. When in truth- if you work harder, you can lighten someone elses load. If everyone completely the cycle, your job wouldn't be as hard.

3) If your going to do something, make it worth it. Don't write shit down, and babble off the top of your mind. Make it mean something, and put effort into it. If it's not your best, I don't want it. I don't ask for perfect - I only ask for YOUR best.

[Darth Wong]

(sigh) if the kid turns in a report that is everything you asked for and more, without having to do any work, do you know who failed? Not him ... YOU. You failed to give him an assignment which would challenge him. Forcing him to pretend to be a slower student in order to get a good grade is such an absurdly farcical solution that it beggars the imagination.

[Zero]

I am student A. Hell, just today, I forgot to study for a chem test dealing with thermodynamics. I forgot to memorize a constant, but I finished early enough that I had time to look at all the questions dealing with that constant, and was able to figure it out based on which value would actually yield one of the answers available on each problem. This does mean there was poor-planning involved on my part, but I worked around it. Why should I be punished for poor planning if the end result is good?

[aerius]

2) While student A may have done it, and still had it in on-time, he didn't give it everything he had. Student B, not quite grasping it, still tried, and gave it everything he had, and it should count for something, otherwise the kid will grow up thinking that he doesn't have to work as hard. When in truth- if you work harder, you can lighten someone elses load. If everyone completely the cycle, your job wouldn't be as hard.

So what if Student A didn't give it all he had, he didn't need to, and I can't blame him. If I gave a 100% effort in writing a paper for say, Psychology, I'd get an A. But why bother when a 10% effort will still get me the same mark? Why should I waste my time and effort?

In the real world you get graded on results, you fuck up, you get fired, the boss doesn't particularly care if you tried hard & gave it your all. If you can't hack the job and get the results you're outta there. You don't get paid for trying, you get paid for succeeding. You can either do the job or you can't, try doesn't enter into it.

[Darth Servo]

A reprimand may simply be pulling Student A aside after class and asking why the lack luster attitude towards the assignment.

Attitude is none of the teacher's business.

[KeVinK]

(sigh) if the kid turns in a report that is everything you asked for and more, without having to do any work, do you know who failed? Not him ... YOU. You failed to give him an assignment which would challenge him. Forcing him to pretend to be a slower student in order to get a good grade is such an absurdly farcical solution that it beggars the imagination.

Indeed.

Which is why in an ideal setting each student should receive individual instruction appropriate to his or her ability and have his or her educational progress assessed through a portfolio of work samples which provide tangible evidence of their accomplishment. A learner would receive a constructive critique of efforts made along with insights into how to develop their skills.

However, this is a very expensive and time consuming process which requires a commitment the government is unwilling to make.

Individual teachers make this commitment. I'll bet every one of us came out of college certain that we would be the one to turn the downward spiral of American education around, we would be the one to open the world to eager young minds hungry to learn.

In the end we settle for saving as many as we can from a system that doesn't give a damn about their potential -- about them. We pull and lift and push until our arms and our hearts and our souls become too weary. Some of us calcify, resigned to their role as one more cog in the machine. Some of us get out -- hopefully before we're so burned out we do more damage than good. And some -- truly heroic figures who will forever command my respect and loyalty -- fight on year after bloody year saving one child in this class, two in the next.

I got out of the classroom. I now do what I can through social services, working one on one with at risk kids. Working to give them the support and guidance they need to succeed. These are kids who overcome challenges their classmates can't imagine just to get to school.

When the kid who does his homework in an all night diner because of the drinking and fighting in his home gets a "D" for grease-stains and spelling errors while the kid who downloaded the report from the internet gets an "A" ...

This is my day job -- trying to get that kid with the "D" to stick with it one more day, to try one more time to overcome a system which has already given up on him. This is what I do when I'm not writing. This perspective is what informs my attitude about grades.

I should probably excuse myself from the rest of the discussion.

[Darth Servo]

The entire notion of a curve is stupid. It means you cannot directly compare results between one class and another then since the curve will be different.

Edit:

Or to put it another way, you didnt know all the material that was expected for the exam. There are three main options:

Flunk you/give you a low grade for not knowing the stuff.
Use a curve and pass people who dont know what the course is meant to test or give them a better grade.
Adjust what the course is meant to test to a more reasonable level.

One of these makes the tests for the given course pointless...

I've known teachers who use data from every class, every year they've taught and base the curve off ALL the data.

[Braedley]

A reprimand may simply be pulling Student A aside after class and asking why the lack luster attitude towards the assignment.

Attitude is none of the teacher's business.

Think about that for a second. A student who has a poor attitude towards assignments will have a poor attitude towards the work they do at there job. Like it or not, teachers play a very important role in childrens lives. Not only is the teacher's job to increase the knowledge and intelligence of their students, but to shape them into productive members of society. That stars off with their attitudes towards what's required of them. Sentiments like yours is why the American education system is still failing on the world stage.

[Ghost Rider]

A reprimand may simply be pulling Student A aside after class and asking why the lack luster attitude towards the assignment.

Attitude is none of the teacher's business.

It should be better stated, attitude has nothing to do with grading. The teacher itself is another part of the kid's life and usually interacts with the child for a period of time greater then anyone barring the parents.

For grading though, that should be maintained as objective as possible, and as such attitude means shit.

[2000AD]

Student A easily, he wasn't born with all that knowlege about the subject and you can't learn that much by sitting on your ass doing nothing.

[ImpishAngel]

(sigh) if the kid turns in a report that is everything you asked for and more, without having to do any work, do you know who failed? Not him ... YOU. You failed to give him an assignment which would challenge him. Forcing him to pretend to be a slower student in order to get a good grade is such an absurdly farcical solution that it beggars the imagination.

So when does the kid grow up and start to challenge himself then?
Not everybody is going to challenge *you* you need to challenge yourself too.

[RedImperator]

How in the world is this even a question? Student A met the requirements. If he wrote it in 45 minutes, then obviously your class isn't challenging enough for him. It's time to start working on a more individual education plan for him so he IS challenged, or, if the school has tracking, maybe it's time he's promoted to a more challenging track.

He DOES need to learn that in the real world, not everything is easy and effort is required. But you teach him that by giving him harder work, not by penalizing him for not jumping through artificial hoops in a Mickey Mouse class.

As for B, obviously he needs help. Individual attention from you, after school tutoring, a more basic individual curriculum for him if necessary if he can't keep up with the average kids. What he doesn't need is a teacher who thinks he's Santa Claus with a bag full of good grades for students who try really really hard.

NOTE: I saw some people on the first page who apparently think citations and bibliographies are "busy work". They're not--they're how you prove 1) that the facts in your paper are actually true, and 2) you didn't plagarize the paper. Omitting a citation or a reference is plagarism, not a technicality, and in college, it will get you flunked.

[Darth Wong]

Individual teachers make this commitment. I'll bet every one of us came out of college certain that we would be the one to turn the downward spiral of American education around, we would be the one to open the world to eager young minds hungry to learn.

In the end we settle for saving as many as we can from a system that doesn't give a damn about their potential -- about them. We pull and lift and push until our arms and our hearts and our souls become too weary. Some of us calcify, resigned to their role as one more cog in the machine. Some of us get out -- hopefully before we're so burned out we do more damage than good. And some -- truly heroic figures who will forever command my respect and loyalty -- fight on year after bloody year saving one child in this class, two in the next.

That's painfully poignant.

I got out of the classroom. I now do what I can through social services, working one on one with at risk kids. Working to give them the support and guidance they need to succeed. These are kids who overcome challenges their classmates can't imagine just to get to school.

When the kid who does his homework in an all night diner because of the drinking and fighting in his home gets a "D" for grease-stains and spelling errors while the kid who downloaded the report from the internet gets an "A" ...

There's a clear social injustice there, but I don't see how the teacher can remedy that by giving the first kid a good mark that isn't merited by his results. Of course, the second kid should fail for cheating, but I know this sort of thing happens often anyway. That's why exams are so important; I'm a big believer in exams, but well-designed ones rather than shitty multiple-choice farces.

[Pick]

Teachers tend to cite whether or not they grade on effort. If they do (which is bullshit), then the teacher should stand by their words and grade on effort. If the teacher professes to grade on quality, they have a commitment to grade on quality and not on effort.

Student A deserves the better grade. They fulfilled the given parameters better than Student B. End of story.

Say these kids were going to become doctors. Who do you think deserves the higher honor? The guy who saved your life or the guy who really, really tried but forgot that the heart is the beaty thing and the liver is the gooshy thing?

[RedImperator]

A reprimand may simply be pulling Student A aside after class and asking why the lack luster attitude towards the assignment.

Attitude is none of the teacher's business.

Think about that for a second. A student who has a poor attitude towards assignments will have a poor attitude towards the work they do at there job. Like it or not, teachers play a very important role in childrens lives. Not only is the teacher's job to increase the knowledge and intelligence of their students, but to shape them into productive members of society. That stars off with their attitudes towards what's required of them. Sentiments like yours is why the American education system is still failing on the world stage.

The reason why the American education system is failing is because it was deliberately designed 100 years ago to produce a small amount of professional and skilled workers and a large mass of semi-skilled blue-collars, and then we turned around and sent all those blue collar jobs to China. Not some bullshit about "poor attitudes". And at any rate, how the fuck you think giving a smart kid a C because he aced your Mickey Mouse assignment in forty-five minutes will teach him anything except that the teacher is an asshole is beyond me.

[Braedley]

Attitude is none of the teacher's business.

Think about that for a second. A student who has a poor attitude towards assignments will have a poor attitude towards the work they do at there job. Like it or not, teachers play a very important role in childrens lives. Not only is the teacher's job to increase the knowledge and intelligence of their students, but to shape them into productive members of society. That stars off with their attitudes towards what's required of them. Sentiments like yours is why the American education system is still failing on the world stage.

The reason why the American education system is failing is because it was deliberately designed 100 years ago to produce a small amount of professional and skilled workers and a large mass of semi-skilled blue-collars, and then we turned around and sent all those blue collar jobs to China. Not some bullshit about "poor attitudes". And at any rate, how the fuck you think giving a smart kid a C because he aced your Mickey Mouse assignment in forty-five minutes will teach him anything except that the teacher is an asshole is beyond me.

Where in that post did I say anything about giving the student a C? I don't see why you have to bring up a point I made on the previous page. One which I might add I conceded.
Anyways, the reasons behind the original structure of the American educational system has little bearing on the current state when little has been done to try and fix it. No, throwing money at it won't fix it, you have to get to the root of the problem, and part of that is teachers and administrators with their attitudes (or lack thereof) towards students. If they don't care about their students, the students are much less likely to succeed. Admittedly, I overgeneralized in saying that teachers are the only problem with the system, but if they don't care about their students, then they deffinately are a part of the problem.

[RedImperator]

Anyways, the reasons behind the original structure of the American educational system has little bearing on the current state when little has been done to try and fix it.

What you don't seem to understand that, with the exception of poor urban and rural schools, the system works just fine as designed. It produces a small (too small, forcing us to import from the third world) amount of professionals, a small (too small, judging by how much they can charge) amount of skilled tradesmen, and a large amount of semi-skilled young adults who would be off to the factories two generations ago. Except now the factories aren't there, so they have to go to college to get the skills they should have coming out of high school, and guess what? The college system, which was designed to train a relatively small number of professionals, is creaking under the strain.

No, throwing money at it won't fix it, you have to get to the root of the problem, and part of that is teachers and administrators with their attitudes (or lack thereof) towards students.

They do care, you dingus. Even the administrators. A lot wind up getting burned out and not caring, but nobody goes into this business for the money or the prestiege, and contrary to whatever "those who can't do, teach" bullshit anyone wants to throw around, most teachers are qualified to do other jobs. The root of the problem is structural, not in some character flaw shared by everyone trying to do the job.

If they don't care about their students, the students are much less likely to succeed. Admittedly, I overgeneralized in saying that teachers are the only problem with the system, but if they don't care about their students, then they deffinately are a part of the problem.

I love how you go from DS's remark--correct--that the kid's attitude towards an assignment he did perfectly isn't any of the teacher's business to "teachers who don't care are part of the problem". Guess what: if a kid turns in an A+ paper to me, I don't care what his fucking attitude was while he wrote it. I thank Ahura Mazda that I've got a kid with potential and work on giving him something more challenging before he decides school is a waste of his time.

A kid's attitude matters when he's challenging your authority or causing problems for other students. It doesn't matter worth a damn what it is while he's doing his homework, as long as it gets done right.

[Ubiquitous]

I voted student A. Sadly, it sounds like what I used to be like back at A-level English lit., which I found incredibly easy. I would start essays literally an hour before class in my free periods, and regually get a 'B', sometimes 'A' grade. The only difference between this example and the OT is that no one else in the class put any special effort in, either. I was [and still am] bored of education, and if I can get by doing as little as possible and still make the grade, then that's fine by me because I am a lazy shit.

Thankfully for you moral people, I have tried to apply this policy to uni work, where I have consistently underachived due to the higher standard of research required.

Still, I do not believe in 'affirmative action' with regards to marking. If one essay is better than the other, then it deserves the higher grade, regardless of how it was achieved [obviously collusion and plagarism are a no-no].

[Braedley]

Anyways, the reasons behind the original structure of the American educational system has little bearing on the current state when little has been done to try and fix it.

What you don't seem to understand that, with the exception of poor urban and rural schools, the system works just fine as designed. It produces a small (too small, forcing us to import from the third world) amount of professionals, a small (too small, judging by how much they can charge) amount of skilled tradesmen, and a large amount of semi-skilled young adults who would be off to the factories two generations ago. Except now the factories aren't there, so they have to go to college to get the skills they should have coming out of high school, and guess what? The college system, which was designed to train a relatively small number of professionals, is creaking under the strain.

No, throwing money at it won't fix it, you have to get to the root of the problem, and part of that is teachers and administrators with their attitudes (or lack thereof) towards students.

They do care, you dingus. Even the administrators. A lot wind up getting burned out and not caring, but nobody goes into this business for the money or the prestiege, and contrary to whatever "those who can't do, teach" bullshit anyone wants to throw around, most teachers are qualified to do other jobs. The root of the problem is structural, not in some character flaw shared by everyone trying to do the job.

If they don't care about their students, the students are much less likely to succeed. Admittedly, I overgeneralized in saying that teachers are the only problem with the system, but if they don't care about their students, then they deffinately are a part of the problem.

I love how you go from DS's remark--correct--that the kid's attitude towards an assignment he did perfectly isn't any of the teacher's business to "teachers who don't care are part of the problem". Guess what: if a kid turns in an A+ paper to me, I don't care what his fucking attitude was while he wrote it. I thank Ahura Mazda that I've got a kid with potential and work on giving him something more challenging before he decides school is a waste of his time.

A kid's attitude matters when he's challenging your authority or causing problems for other students. It doesn't matter worth a damn what it is while he's doing his homework, as long as it gets done right.[/quote]

DS's comment isn't correct. The attitudes of the students towards school, assignments, teachers, I can go on, is always the concern of the teachers. A good teacher is always looking for the various attitudes of their students, positive or negative. Teachers are the first people capable of turning a kids life around. If they don't take action, then the kid will slip through the cracks, and that costs everyone a significant chunk of change in taxes. Some of the kids that don't make it because a teacher didn't put that little extra effort into that one student end up as small time crooks, others are on wellfare. A number of them prove to be productive members of society, but the rest are just a drain on resources. The only time a kids attitude doesn't matter to a teacher is...well...never.

[RedImperator]

DS's comment isn't correct. The attitudes of the students towards school, assignments, teachers, I can go on, is always the concern of the teachers. A good teacher is always looking for the various attitudes of their students, positive or negative. Teachers are the first people capable of turning a kids life around. If they don't take action, then the kid will slip through the cracks, and that costs everyone a significant chunk of change in taxes. Some of the kids that don't make it because a teacher didn't put that little extra effort into that one student end up as small time crooks, others are on wellfare. A number of them prove to be productive members of society, but the rest are just a drain on resources. The only time a kids attitude doesn't matter to a teacher is...well...never.

Are you aware of what it is that I do five days a week, when I'm not in graduate courses at the University of Pennsylvania? I teach 11th grade US history in the City of Philadelphia public school system. I know full fucking well the responsibility I have towards those kids, and I'll thank you for not lecturing me about it again.

As to the substance, such as it is, of your point: again, I repeat, if the kid's work is so good he can ace an essay in 45 minutes, the problem isn't with his attitude. And if he does have one, I'd say he's earned it. He treats school like a joke because it is one--a waste of his time and the time of those who are teaching him. The solution is not to reprimand him for his attitude, which is essentially blaming him for your failure as an educator, but to challenge him with work that's actually worth a damn.

Frankly, the problem with teaching isn't the teachers who say "I don't care how he does it as long as he does it well". It's the ones with attitudes like yours. I've spent four months now trying to unteach an astounding array of bad habits taught to my kids by teachers more concerned with procedure and quantitiy of work than quality. I don't totally blame them because the elementary school teachers are beleaguered and the middle school teachers have to act like prison guards just to keep their classes from falling apart, but your idiocy has no such excuse.

Oh, and on the matter of structural problems in the school system: I noticed you chose not to respond to that point at all. Concession accepted.