Advertisement
The Edutopia Poll
by Sara Ring
Is 50 the new 0? Some schools now give a minimum semester score of 50 percent to all failing students, whether their actual numerical average is 50, 30, or even 0. The idea is to give struggling students a chance to improve their grade and pass the class, which might not otherwise be possible for those who have done poorly in the first part of the year.
Those in favor of the "minimum F" argue that this grade inflation gives students an incentive to work harder to pass the class, and they point out that 50 percent is still failing. But opponents of the practice feel that students should not receive more credit than they've earned and that this padding encourages some students to slack off. They also worry that this practice will not prepare students for the challenges of college and the workforce. Should all failing students receive a grade of 50 percent? Tell us what you think!
Physics and 9th grade Physical Science
I'm already incredibly (probably far too) generous in allowing students to make up work. Yet, in three years, I've had one student manage to pull off a perfect 0%, and, at least, 10 others stay under 15%.
At some point, students have to learn that there's a connection between work and results. This idea not only helps them game the system, but implies that we condone it.
We're supposed to actually be teaching them the material and helping them to become responsible members of society along the way. This idea does neither. It seems far more designed to make graduation numbers look pretty, shove kids out the door with a diploma, and hope no one notices that they didn't learn anything along the way...
High School English
The good old-fashioned A,B,C,D,F system makes much more sense than the 0-100 system. In Texas, the grading system allows a 10 point interval for A,B, and D; a 5 point interval for C (the old center of the bell curve) and a whopping 60 point interval for failures. Statistically, this grading system is pretty flawed. Kids who earn a 30 for the first nine weeks can't possibly pass the semester, no matter how hard they try. Instead of giving kids an artificial grade they don't earn--the 50%--post an F. If they make a B or an A the next nine weeks, they pass.
As much as some pundits think that grading should be completely quantified, assignments and tests are subject to a variety of errors and will forever be somewhat subjective. An F is still an F, whether it's a high one or a low one.
50% grades
I started implementing this policy the 2nd semester in my classroom this school year. I found that for those students very close to passing seemed more motivated than they would have been if they were 20% or more away from a passing grade. When I've had students in the past who were at 30 or 40%, they felt that the damage was done, so why bother. This semester I haven't had to deal with that defeatist attitude and I've had only a handful of students truly fail.
The new paradigm is encouraging all kids to make it - not just the academic smart kids. Why should an F be from 0-59 points? Isn't the point of education to provide for all kids to be successful? We aren't lowering the bar - we are providing scaffolding to help all students. Is differentiation lowering the bar? no, it's understanding that all kids aren't equal. They don't come to our classes the same and it's our job as professionals to encourage and motivate students who need it the most.
Rounding UP
I believe that we should grade student proficiency in the standards that are established in the curriculum. It's not the points, it's the degree of proficiency that the student has attained and the growth in these standards during the course that are of interest. Points are only somewhat related to these two concerns.
On the other hand, if educators are required to provide percentage or letter grades, rather than standards-based reporting, then a 50% (or other minimal percentage) assures parents that one poor performance will not overly bias an assessment of a student's work for an entire grading period.
Is 50 the new 0?
Students identified by a low score are to be engaged with other teaching/learning processes to achieve a grade that is up to high standards
As a classroom teacher since the early 1070's, I have seen the value of the 50 for a grade of F be both helpful and harmful for the justifications given in your choices.
I believe, however, that while students have not basically changed, society has changed. It seems to me that both in school and out the emphasis is upon that of the convenient and the immediate rather than that of self discipline and earned respect. More that ever, I see students who want the A with a C- amount/quality of work and parents who strongly support this attitude. With this student/parent attitude, failure eventually occurs in most classes which have a teacher who has high expectations - even if that teacher makes himself/herself available for before and after school tutoring to help students rise to the level of these expectations.
Because of this, I believe that a one time "blue light special" grade of 50 can be a very good thing and can be a wake-up call to the students who has "coasted" through classes.
The student's choices, however, must have consequences.
A one time grade of 50 says to the student that the school/teacher is willing to work with him/her IF he/she is willing to work. Bottom line? The student must be willing to work, and the teacher must be willing to teach.
A second grade of 50 says that a) the student and his/her parent(s)/guardian(s) do not believe the school/teacher and think the grade fairy is alive and well, b) that the teacher and student have not come to a clear understanding of what the learning expectations are and upon what the grading will be based and made a mutual commitment to rise to the expectations of passing, or c) that the school/teacher has, with my apologies to Robert Frost, taken the road most often traveled and is offering the platitude of "At least we have tried" - creating a situation where, in my opinion, both the school/teacher and the student fail.
In the "real world" - the one in which we must prepare the student to live and to work - the employer is not going to keep giving the employee who "fails" to do his/her job the proverbial grade of 50 and keep the salary coming!
It's a no-brainer
It's really the only way to go, if you still insist on averaging grades. There aren't 50 points between any two other grades (i.e. from an A or 90 percent to a B or 80 percent). A 50 point difference from the high score for an F to the zero for not doing an assignment doesn't even make sense. It's a punishment for an individual assignment that you have placed far too much a value on.
If a grading scale is based on 100% and a 0% is given, then an F is the only grade that is worth over half of the entire grading scale (0-59%)and every other grade is only worth 10% each. If the bottom of the scale was 50%, then everything would be weighted evenly.
Failing Grades
If a student is unable to raise their grade in order to pass, any incentive they have to continue effort in that class is gone. If what we value is their learning, we need to place less stress on grades and more stress on mastery - at whatever the cost to the way things have always been done.