In defense of the new Cotati-Rohnert Park grading system

I’d like to expand upon the recent PD article about grading in the Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District (“Cotati-RP schools rethink grades,” Thursday). What may not have come through, amid all the confusion, is the reasoning behind our search for a better way to grade students.

For about the past 15 years, teachers have been using electronic grading programs to keep track of grades. While there are many benefits to the programs, they have an unintended consequence: They report a simple average of scores entered rather the more intuitive method of examining students’ grade trends.

This way of calculating grades skews the results. To illustrate, let’s look at two students. Student X comes to my English class with excellent skills and knowledge. From the beginning of the semester to the end, she consistently scores in the 90 percent range. At the end of the semester, her grade is calculated as a well-earned A.

Now let’s look at student Y. Through no fault of her own and for myriad possible reasons, she comes to my English class with a deficit of skills in reading, writing and even staying organized. Her early assignments earn abysmal grades, and she determines to do better. Through our school’s various interventions — and especially through her own hard work — she masters the skills being taught in my class.

By the end of the semester, she is scoring in the high 80s on assessments similar to the ones she failed earlier.

Is it not right to give her a grade reflective of her mastery of the class material?

This is a response to an earlier article:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3351657/posts

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/4640349-181/rohnert-park-cotati-schools-rethink

Here’s an analogy; a team plays .700 ball and has a guaranteed spot in the playoffs. Another team plays .250 ball but wins their last 20 straight and even sweeps the .700 team. Should the .250 team be allowed in the playoffs because of marked improvement?

How about this; do you hire the best doctor with the long proven track record for your heart transplant or do you hire the late bloomer?

my daughter is an administrator in a a Texas school.
She believes in this and she makes some sense.

If kids are graded as is, a kid who fails miserably on a test or assignment early, may have no hope of recovering.

A 50% or less will kill the average for the rest of the year, regardless of how well the kid does in the future.

The problem is, I haven't seen any info regarding any kid who sucked early and got way better later.

Also, I can't seem to find any statistics to show how many or what percentage of the school or school district kids falls within the suck guidelines.

Which leads me to believe more kids are in the suck guidelines than not, otherwise, why come up with this program ?

Before we let the computer do the grades for us, I’d cut the kid who made a big improvement a little bit of slack on his final grade—if the average was 68%, I might give him a C- instead of a D+. I am the one evaluating him or her as a student, not the computer.

Where I have a problem with their new system is that assignments not handed in are given a 50% instead of a 0%—as the article said, a student who didn’t do the assignment could get a better grade than one who did poorly. I used the pain of that 0% caused on a final grade to make the point that the “real world” is much more like daily work/home work than tests are. If you don’t do what’s expected/required of you while on the job, you’ll likely be fired. (Some government jobs may be an exception to that, however).

It is a hard deal, no doubt but failure is a part of learning. Advancing a mediocre to poor student as though they are competent is a disservice to all.

The problem is that educators are more concerned with socialization, keeping age groups together, and stigmatization than in education.

If someone is struggling as much as this opinion piece suggests, they do not belong in that class. If someone fails to do that work they need to repeat that class.

Will this failing student accept that the mechanic worked really, really hard on his car but failed to fix it or that he has four times the hours hence a greater fee than a more competent mechanic? I do not think so. Go to any major sporting events and listen to how ruthless the fans are concerning player ability yet we should turn a blind eye in academic performance? I do not think so.

Furthermore, the scenario this writer advances is very unlikely. Students who fail to turn in work or start out in the “D” range seldom advance to the “A” range in only a semester.

I used to weigh later, more comprehensive exams more than earlier work, and my finals covered everything, so the late starters who eventually mastered everything weren’t penalized for poor early performance. That way, fewer students gave up early.

This was in an ESL class, and a lot of students had to learn study skills, as well as English, from me.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.