quote:Originally posted by Godric: So why did the student get a 64%? Why wouldn't it just be raised to 50%? In my mind there's a big difference between raising a grade that is below 50% to 50% (which is still an F) and raising it to a 64%, which would be a passing grade (D).
All of his 0s were changed to 50. So when averaged with the few assignments he did do his overall grade went to 64.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Godric: So why did the student get a 64%? Why wouldn't it just be raised to 50%? In my mind there's a big difference between raising a grade that is below 50% to 50% (which is still an F) and raising it to a 64%, which would be a passing grade (D).
All of his 0s were changed to 50. So when averaged with the few assignments he did do his overall grade went to 64.
OK. I understand now. I thought the 38% was a specific assignment.
But yeah, this touches on a couple of my points. Does this student have the adequate knowledge to pass on to the next level?
Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Godric: So why did the student get a 64%? Why wouldn't it just be raised to 50%? In my mind there's a big difference between raising a grade that is below 50% to 50% (which is still an F) and raising it to a 64%, which would be a passing grade (D).
All of his 0s were changed to 50. So when averaged with the few assignments he did do his overall grade went to 64.
OK. I understand now. I thought the 38% was a specific assignment.
But yeah, this touches on a couple of my points. Does this student have the adequate knowledge to pass on to the next level?
posted
Good news. After about a million phone calls and emails to the Board from teachers, they reversed it. We are again free to give zeros when deserved.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Good news. After about a million phone calls and emails to the Board from teachers, they reversed it. We are again free to give zeros when deserved.
posted
I think a fair compromise that would motivate students and still be fair would be a hybrid of the two ideas.
If you turn the work in, the lowest grade you can get is 50%. You showed the effort to complete the assignment, and because of that, you get some credit, even if every answer is incorrect.
If you do NOT turn in any assignment because you are lazy, then a 0 should be given. You didn't show any initiative, so why get something for nothing?
The teachers I had in high school would use the "Drop 2" method. Your two lowest test scores would be dropped at the end of the quarter. I loved it because if I did well on all of the tests during the quarter I could effectively skip the last two tests of the quarter, go grab some Arby's or Jack in the Box, and still get an "A" for the quarter.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no problem with that option (in fact, my policy was similar, back when I was teaching), IF AND ONLY IF that is an option chosen by teachers, not thrust upon them by administration.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dropping two tests seems a little extreme. I described above dropping homework assignments, and I liked that system.
I know here in college, I've had some classes where they weigh your lowest test score a little less, and I think that's a better method because tests are a better indication of what you know, IMHO.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: Dropping two tests seems a little extreme.
It depends how often you give tests. If they are weekly (or even ever-other-weekly), it might be quite reasonable.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a college prof that did drop 2. The final counted as 2 tests, so if you had 90% on test before the final, there was not mush point in taking it. I thought that with a cumulative final, if you had aced everything up to then, you shouldn't have to do it (I know the argument against that, how the smaller tests just show I learned it on that one day, not retained). I also liked the idea of homework being used if it helped, but not hurt. I had a lot of teachers who gave homework but never graded it. I liked the idea that effort could move me from a B to an A, if my test scores weren't that great, but I could see their point that the hw really didn't say what I had learned.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
rivka, is that normal? I can't remember having weekly or every-other-weekly tests, but I've been out of grade school too long to trust my memory.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I recall having weekly tests (small-ish ones, along with larger mid and finals) in a few of my classes.
Posts: 1295 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: I thought that with a cumulative final, if you had aced everything up to then, you shouldn't have to do it (I know the argument against that, how the smaller tests just show I learned it on that one day, not retained).
My Thermo professor's policy was that if you aced the (cumulative) final you got an A regardless of the rest of your grades for the semester because you had demonstrated that you learned the material. Since the average on most of his exams was around 50% it wasn't likely to happen, though.
Posts: 409 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alright. I retract my statement about dropping two exams if they are offered weekly or bi-weekly. That seems fair to me.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a bit late on the math games and all, but I am surprised that everyone went at this plan with the following thought.
Kid A gets a 0 on his first test, what does he have to get on the rest to make a specific grade. Then they compare other folks.
The first test is usually the refresher. It is usually going over material taught in previous years. It is usually the easiest.
Now suppose Kid A gets a 100 on his first quarter of 3rd grade. He is guaranteed to pass that grade based on stuff he learned in 2nd grade because 100, 50, 50, 50 is 62.5--or in some schools--passing. Even if he needs to hit 65 or 70 to pass, diligent work in just the first semester will mean he can do nothing the second.
This system actually discourages work being done the second half of the year, when it is supposed to be encouraging.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I have no problem with that option (in fact, my policy was similar, back when I was teaching), IF AND ONLY IF that is an option chosen by teachers, not thrust upon them by administration.
I don't know. I have mixed emotions about that. I don't like things thrust upon me by admin. But at the same time, I do think grading should be standardized. It used to anger me as a student when a friend had a teacher that graded nicely, dropping low grades and such. I don't think its right for the randomness of who your teacher is should effect your grading scale.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think forcing such policies will standardize grades at all. I dropped tests, when I taught, and I was also one of the hardest graders most of my students had ever had. My rep was "strict but fair", and students knew that if they got an A or B in my class, they had earned that grade.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only problem wit that is that test taking IS a part of life, and isn't about to go away.
Also, didn't that leave you open to claims of favoritism and discriminating against kids you didn't care for in class? I know at least a few people I know who teach have had issues with that even thought they DO use quizzes and tests in class, so that was the first thing that popped into my head looking at it from the teachers perspective...
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
