This article was the subject of the PLC staff meeting we had Wednesday morning.
I had read the article some time ago and was intrigued by it. The premise is that teachers should not give students zeroes. It's just not mathematically logical.
Now, without revealing my horrendous math skills, I'll try to elaborate on it as simply as possible. The theory is that if you assign a grade scale such as 90 (cut off for an A), 80 (cut off for a B), 70 (cut off for a C), 60 (cut off for a D) and 59 or below is all an F, and if you give a student a 0, you are punishing them too severely.
I can see the point. Just as I can see the point in saying that you cannot count a student with an unexcused absence when they are suspended.
But just because I can see the point doesn't mean I don't think it's a total load of BS.
The message, then, would be if a student turns in an essay and it's lacking voice and style and it happens to be riddled with errors and they earn a 60 or a D-, then that's fair. But if a student totally says screw this, I'm going to skip and not bother to do it and submit it, well, I'm being too harsh on them with a 0, I'm being unfair. Would it be better to give them a 59, in essence an F+? Why should only one point separate them? Even though one student actually did the work and another didn't.
See, I think this gets at the heart of what is wrong with education and raising this generation of millennials.
We stigmatize mistakes and failure.
Sometimes the best thing that can happen is failure.
We tell EVERYONE that they're good and successful. That just ain't the case though.
Hasn't anyone seen Pixar's The Incredibles? It makes this same point: if everyone is special, then that's really the same as no one is special.
Of course, the author works for a curriculum assessment organization, so he would likely stand to profit from there being no zeroes out there.
But if I don't show up for work for a week, do I get 59% of a paycheck?
One argument for the case against zero that was brought up at our table was if a kid falls behind or is just lazy and does squat for three weeks, then they offer the standard excuse, Well, why should I try? I'll never get caught up?
That is where you tell this student, that is why we have the ALC. Go work at Walmart for a bit and then enroll at the ALC.
Now, was that so hard?
But because we are afraid to tell it like it is and we want to make everyone feel warm and cuddly and cozy, well, that just doesn't happen.
If we cannot tell a kid to man up and deal with the consequences, then why shouldn't I tell my best students, you know what, you can attend one day a week because you work so damn hard and are so brilliant. Here are your essays prompts. Write them and turn them in at the end of the semester, which, for you, will probably be in three weeks because you're just so damned gifted!
While I was reading the article, I jotted down the title of the article I wanted to write in response to "The Case Against Zero" . . . "The Case For Doing Your Fu*&^%g Work and Turning It In On Time."
7 comments:
What I found particularly troublesome about the article
is that it further distances students from RESPONSIBiLITY for their actions/inaction. Our students need to realize that, in this life, there are CONSEQUENCES for decisions made; and In the greater scheme of things, this lesson is far more important than knowing how to conjugate a Spanish verb.
Yes. Research shows - as Alfie Kohn and Debrah Meier are quick to point out - parents believe it is just as important for schools to teach their children how to be good people as it is to educate them.
I'm afraid "The Case Against Zero" really does neither of those.
You have to decide what it is that is more important for you to teach--writing or the stinging lesson of responsibility. You have students with little motivation or support at home and your failure lesson is one they know well. We say that we want them to learn "responsibility". If we give an assignment, we feel it is important for our students to practice. We are not holding them responsible if we allow them to opt out of the assignment. Both teacher and student have taken the easy way out. What is hard and what is right is to truly make the student responsible for the work by making him/her do it! The natural consequence for not doing an assignment is not getting a zero, it is clearly having to spend some of "their time" to finish it and then move through more restrictive measures until it gets done. We use our gradebook as a discipline referral too much. What does a student's grade mean in your book? Knowledge of writing or responsibility? How is that responsibility lesson going to help the student write a paper later on? Elementary teachers prepare for middle school, middle school prepares for high school, high school prepares for college or work experience. Punitive grading practices don't teach responsibility. Our assignments reveal it or the lack of it. There are tough cases out there that have some real issues with getting work done. It takes a great deal of work to make sure they pass classes. Achievement and grades increase dramatically with this practice, however. How many teachers can just let a student fail, teaching him "responsibility" before he has a gap a mile wide in learning? If a student is responsible for their learning, what is the teacher responsible for? Standing and giving a lecture? Teachers need to take responsility for student learning and actively work toward student mastery of the concepts. Teachers teach. They care about whether a student fails or achieves. Many teachers speak of responsibility and the "real world". There isn't a teacher anywhere that hasn't missed a deadline at some time--posting grades, setting up an evaluation time, etc. As a principal, I have teachers that miss deadlines all the time. I don't deduct their pay or wait until their evaluation at the end of the year and hit them with an unsatisfactory for it. I make them turn in what they need to turn in. Results are results. No zero works. It has made a huge difference in motivation, grades, and achievement over time. Try it for yourself--get down off of the soap box and work with your students. It is a large leap, but it is worth it
I agree completely. 0% effort, 0% credit.
In the American educational system, the only excuses for failure are laziness and mental disabilities.
And, to Brian, I don't believe she ever said anything about the teachers not doing their part, or about it not being the teachers' responsibility to interact with the students. This certainly seems to be from a teacher who does her job but has students who do not.
Mind you, I'm only a senior in an alternative high school (In this case, one in which you work at your own pace and get out of the program what you put into it.), but I feel this gives me a perspective not seen by school administration. I'm in a classroom with two teachers, both of whom are actively involved with the students; they help with work, answer any questions the students might have, point them in the right direction with any problems the students might bring up, etcetera. There are some students (such as myself) who work hard consistently, and some who do what's required. There are a few students, however, who put in almost no effort at all, and I believe that these are who TeacherScribe is referring to.
Please pardon my writing. It's 12:30 AM, I'm tired, I'm not putting in any effort.
(-Insert 0% credit here.-)
As a follow-up to my last comment, I should change all references to TeacherScribe to male, because I just looked at the picture.
Whoops.
I teach at a high school, and I had reservations about this as well, for the same reasons listed above. I do not like the idea of 1 point separating a paper that does not meet standards and just not turning it in. With that said (and I'm no math genius) I do understand that a zero is not mathematically fair. I've started giving 40% grades instead 0s. In my class, you can still earn an F on an assignment, but generally no lower than 50%. So giving a 40% F mathematically makes sense.
Think about it:
A: 90%
B: 80%
C: 70%
D: 60%
F: 50%
don't turn it in, 40%
...why should I increase the punishment by 50% points?
A 40% is still an F, it's just a mathematically fair F.
I'm sorry TeacherScribe, but I agree with Brian 100% (no pun intended) and I'll bet he's a great principal. The lesson to be taught is that you can screw up and still redeem yourself. Not that if you screw up then you become a Screw Up because the price for redemtion is just too high. And Rayn, I like your idea. It accounts for fairness and the unequitable weight of 0%. As a special education teacher I'd like to remind everyone that fair is not everyone getting the same thing, fair is everyone getting what they need to be successful. Aren't successful students the goal of teachers?
Zoe
Post a Comment