babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
No Zero policy-deux
June 5, 2012 - 7:19am
Bump.
Okay, so I think that is the premise of your argument that a student should not receive a zero for not turning in a particular piece of work.
Can you explain that a bit more? Why should there be no "mixing [of] consequences"?
For me, Caissa, these are not mixing consequences. One flows naturally from the other in a predictable way. Especially if the policy is clearly explained beforehand and there are warnings and opportunities to avoid the consequence.
Margaret Wente's column today was on the subject of the teacher from the first thread's OP. While I don't necessarily agree with Wente's opinions usually, she's not too nuts today. Anyway, she quotes Dorval on his policy, which seems to result in very few zeroes at the end of the semester in any event. I think there's been the assumption that zero = completely draconian policy that sets students up to fail. I don't think there's any evidence that this is the case at all.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/the-classroom-hero-of-zero/article4230726/
I was half hoping someone would start up another one. I had a post all ready to go last night that got destroyed when the last thread was closed.
I had an interesting conversation yesterday evening over soccer with a teacher friend who supports no-zero, but sees serious flaws in the Edmonton policy (apparently they also do no zero at his school as well - with a difference).
He feels that giving a zero for no work is in fact letting the student off the hook. In his school students just don't get to go any farther until they finish the work. How exactly that works I don't know, but he did say that in the case of one course if the work isn't done in June it will still be there in September. I did not get the details (we were in the middle of a game) but the work does not go away - ever. And that is part of what he felt is missing from the policy in the news.
I can live with that.
In another class (mathematics, I believe it was) if a student hands in the work early he points out which answers were wrong, and the student has a chance to try again. Hand it in late, and there is no such option. Don't hand it in at all, and there is no grade, but the percentage value of the final exam then expands to include that missed work.
He said he doesn't care if students hand in any course work, so long as they know the material, and if they are willing to risk it all on the final, so be it. So long as there is a final reckoning, it sounds okay to me. If anything, I think that method is a bit more harsh on students, and demands that they learn more self-discipline. SInce although there is an added incentive, there is also greater leeway to procrastinate.
I raised my son using consequences and he is doing well. I don't see how giving zeros is going to help many students and I think that for the students who are most likely to get a zero it will just turn them off of school even more. If giving zeros worked then the graduation rates and overall success of our previous students must be what we are aiming for. Seems to me an approach that tries to push kids who don't fit the mold into becoming responsible just pushes them out the door shortly after reaching the age to leave school. That is of course if they weren't first suspended for missing classes.
We have serious issues with educating kids especially teenagers. They are teenagers which to me means by definition full of raging hormones and doubt. Of course teenagers need to learn these things that is why you "harp" at them and then are extremely pleased when they get it by 21 instead of 25. Telling teenagers to be on time for many of them is like telling them not to sleep for 12 hours a day.
@kropotkin - Re: kids most likely to get zero - I think you're conflating two different issues. There's a bigger and more difficult problem there. And what I've been saying from the start is that if there is an issue that isn't simply the ability to get organized, then that should be identified and there are other supports that should be in place. It doesn't really matter, for most of those kids, whether there's a no-zero policy or not. They're still going to need other supports within the school system and where the system falls down is in not providing those.
@ Caissa - if you're going to measure strictly on the quality of work, then my kid would have straight As and zero motivation to work at her weak spot. Thanks but no thanks!
The time limit is part of the assignment. It does not, in that case, taint the integrity of the assignment.
I guess we are going not find common ground on this Timebandit. I think other consequences can be found that will make passing in assignments late an unpleasant experience.
@ Caissa
Even though I recognize my friend's position, I have no problem with there being a grade penalty for lateness.
After all, if you don't wake up in time to make the call to get the tickets for that concert you wind up with a seat that is not as good. Simple, right?
You don't change the pads on your brakes on time, and you'll be paying to have your rotors machined.
Don't pay your bill; they cut your phone off.
And in many schools, there is a consequence for too many absences, even though that has nothing to do with comprehension of the course material.
Sorry, but organizational skills are important, and just as much a part of learning as critical thinking. I'd venture to say they have even more of an impact on preparing one for independant living.
Personally, I have no problem with meeting deadlines being part of the learning process. From the sound of it that is probably lesson number one for a lot of kids. And after all, it is not like your high school record follows you to the grave. It is a bit of a paradoxical argument to say that grades have little meaning on the one hand (and what does it mean to say that you cannot receive a zero, if not that? ), while at the same time raising the spectre that they can scar a person for life.
I'd be interested to hear what those are, Caissa, and how natural or arbitrary they are. One thing that I've found with my kids is that they're very keen to what seems connected and what doesn't. Not getting a mark on something you haven't done seems pretty clear.
I was talking with Ms B about this last night, and she seemed to think the only thing that really got her attention was the zero she might get. The other, softer consequences were things she figured she could live with. The other component of getting a zero was me knowing about it. That made her motivated to work a little harder at it, even though she fought us on being involved at first (and still does, periodically). So I'm looking at this through a lens of having had to deal directly with the issue for the last 9 months, having some trial and error over consequence and rewards. Bearing in mind, of course, that I'm approaching this as a parent and I don't know normal - I just know my own kids.
Conflating two issues in a discussion of something that is multidimensional hardly seems like something to be derided. What is school policy for, including the issues around any no zero policy, if it is not to have as many kids as possible achieve their personal potential?
So Timebandit what are your expectations of teenagers? I personally don't expect teenagers to become adults before they mature. That is what the maturing process is for. I also think that few teenagers react positively to things like zeros or even no zeros without a motivated teacher trying to understand who the kid is and then making a connection.
Consequences are important but as a useful motivator they are irrelevant unless you know the actual child involved. What motivates your daughter might not have motivated my son. A set of consequences that my son might find a learning moment might be met with a shrug by another kid who doesn't care about the same things. I have a hard time seeing the issue of zero or no zero being a useful debate starting point for talking about how to achieve better outcomes for children.
ETA
Cross posted with you Timebandit and it seems that we are making the same point about kids being individuals.
I mentioned a few suggestions upthread. Serving detention until the work is completed, losing extra-curricular privileges, inability to move on to next grade if you have not presented a sufficient body of evidence to be assessed etc..
We aren't disgreeing on the importance of organizational skills, Timebandit.
I'm trying to approach this as a teacher and less as a parent. As a teacher might grade should be assessing the quality of the work with which I have been presented. As parents of a high school student with Aspergers, we stay on top of his deadlines and help him to develop a schedule to meet them. If he does not want to complete his work in a timely fashion he loses those things which distract him from doing the work (TV, computers, DS games). He may not have learned the concept of delayed gratification yet but he completes his work in order to have his privileges restored.
Who said anything about not having mindful teachers? That is crucial in my mind, and frankly I think that in some cases that includes setting up clear boundaries and requirements and following through on them.
And bear in mind, this policy isn't something that can be kept in reserve for those who need it; it is across the board. That is the main reason why I think it is a mistake.
Why do you think taking marks off for passing something in late "taints the integrity of the assignment"?
As I note below...
But, the "quality of work" includes more than a mere quantitative measure of a student's understanding of a subject. A mark - even if used as you envision it - already measures, indirectly but in a very real way, a student's character (no, not their "moral character" but character traits like diligence and hard work).
For example, let's say you have two equally talented (intellectually) students in a class. One does the bare minimum to pass (and just barely passes) while the other diligently studies her materials, is actively engaged in class, and often foregoes doing fun stuff with her friends so that she can set aside a substantial portion of time away from school doing homework (and she gets a top mark).
When you grade those two students, are you purely measuring "the quality of their work" in any sense that is divorced from "performance character"? No. The student who is employing the soft skills (as Timebandit called them) is the one who succeeds.
Being timely with work is just another soft skill - and a skill that will be very valuable to that student later in life, just like the other soft skills that are needed to do well in school.
You don't grade students Sven, you grade artifacts that they create.
@ kropotkin - I don't think we're really all that far apart on this issue, we're just coming at it from slightly different angles.
I don't expect my teenager to be an adult. In my case, I've got a 14 yr old with a high need for independence, but without all the skills necessary to do well being completely independent. We're walking a very fine line right now and yup, it can have its volatile days. I do think, though, that negative consequences when you mess up is part of learning that independence and developing some maturity. I also know that a no-zero policy would have made teaching her some skills that she needs to have if she wants greater independence much more difficult.
Again, I'm talking strictly from my own perspective. Also should note that Dorval, the teacher who was suspended in Edmonton, sounds like he was a motivated teacher who was trying to work with his students to help them achieve.
But those "artifacts" are a direct result a student internalizing and adopting powerful character skills (or not). So, you are already rewarding students who internalize and use those character skills. In that sense, you really are grading the student.
It's impossible to grade a student Sven. It is impossible to grade what a student know or what a student is capable of doing. The artifacts we have them create is our imperfect way of trying to assess their knowledge and abilities.
Right. And you're not just measuring knowledge but also, as you say, their abilities. And abilities are not just intellectual abilities -- they also include character abilities (diligence, hard work, focus, organization, etc.).
So, you're already measuring those soft skills. Timeliness is just another soft skill.
As I said, I'm not talking about "moral character," Timebandit. I'm talking about "performance character" (see the New York Times piece I linked to above) -- those are learned skills.
Well, it is a value judgment. Any time you say that it's good to have Skill X and bad (or "less preferable," if you wish) to not have Skill X, you are making a value judgment.
That other issue is we rarely measure what a student learns but rather attempt to measure what a student knows. pre-testing and post-testing would get us closer to measuring learning.
Seriously, take a look at that Times article above. It will articulate my point better than I can.
Well, measuring what a student knows is probably more important than measuring their incremental knowledge acquisition over any given period of time. After all, if you're asked to fix a car, perform a surgery, solve a problem of any sort, give someone a shot, drive a vehicle, or every other thing that needs to be done in life, all that matters is: Do you know how do to it? Do you have the requisite knowledge to perform the task?
It's probably very useful for an educator to know where a student sits on a particular knowledge spectrum, so that the teacher can focus on the right issues for that student. But, at the end of the day, does the student know the subject or not?
Pre and post testing doesn't preclude you frrom measuring what a student knows,; it just also allows you to measure what a student has learnt.
Fair enough.