Education: No Zero Grading Policy Opinions

[shootthebandit]

I Had a certain strain of this bullcrap in high school but it was only in the maths and sciences and they started it in my 3rd year by the 4th they wanted to expand it to English and I think history.

the basic Idea was you could get in all your work at any time but if you were missing to many assignments you got this f**king 'I' for Incomplete instead of your actual grade, and if you didn't get enough assignments turned it your grade wasn't counted at the end of the year. didn't matter if you just skipped out on the home work but passed all the tests with flying colors. I almost failed my 4 classes for late homework on subjects I went on to get A's on the tests.

The fact that homework is even part of your grade baffles me. Surely anyone can do your homework for you where as a test is under controlled conditions?

When i was at school (scotland) all of our grades where based on an exam at the end of the course which was under controlled conditions. Homework for us was just a way for the teacher to know that you have an understanding of what you were taught and where your weak points are

 

[FPLOON]

Hmmm... Let's see...

1. America, born and raise... on the Cali-playground, where I spent most of my days...

2. It's an interesting policy that I'm sure my best friend would LOVE, considering according to our school system, he's was considered not only smarter than me when comparing grade-point averages, but also he was too lazy to do work that he deemed "too easy for him" in retrospect... He would have dominated this policy more than me, thus proving to the school district that he was more than capable of getting that High School diploma... instead of a GED (which is WAY EASIER than getting a High School diploma, according to him...)

3. Well, if it was ever was adapted in America, it would soon turn into a numbers game one way or another... meaning there will be those that remember more things than another, thus they will get the better opportunity than someone who is "playing by the rules", per se... It weird saying that this policy can be manipulated in some way, but I'm not ruling that thought out... given how America works in general...

4. No zeros or F's... Sounds like my kind of conformance... It also brings out more of a open-ended way of thinking in terms of learning in general... More creative possibilities... It's not the grades that makes the person... It's something else... and this "No Zero Grading" policy is just the thing to reveal it... (Too bad I'm neck-deep in worrying about getting the right grades in order to be successful to society to find what really makes the person...)

 

[TWRule]

So I have a few questions for you:
1. What did you grow up with? (And where?)
2. What do you think of the no zero policy?
3. What do you think is wrong with the policy?
and 4. What do you think is right with the policy?

1. I grew up in the U.S. It wasn't until 7th grade and we were becoming teenagers that we had zeros - before that we had a qualitative system: "Excellent, satisfactory, unsatisfactory" (basically the equivalent of A, C, or F).
2. I think it makes no real difference. I can't imagine why it was motivated other than some attempt to put less psychological stress on young students, but an F is just as demoralizing as a zero - maybe moreso because if you are getting a zero, it's probably because you deliberately put no effort into the assignment at all, so you are less likely to care about your score, whereas a non-zero F could mean you tried (at least minimally) and weren't good enough.
3. Nothing particularly wrong with the policy, it's just equally arbitrary as any basic grading scale.
4. If it had any advantage, it would be in situations where the student has legitimate reasons for say, not submitting an assignment on time - something important kept them from doing so, or maybe they just are resistant to being in school - this gives them a little more chance to recover down the line if they so choose (if it works like I'm thinking). Of course, that doesn't solve the underlying problems that make those situations problems in the first place...

Now, I'm all for it, based on the fact that the no zero policy grades based on ability rather than behaviour. Public education isn't meant to teach behaviour, it's supposed to teach skills.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. How should one grading scale be taken to grade something different than another? Literally the only difference between this and another grading scale, if I'm understanding properly, is that the minimum grade is a non-zero F? There doesn't seem to be any inherent difference to what is being assessed there (and on top of that, I'd question the strong distinction you want to draw between 'behavior' and 'skills' in this context, but that's a separate issue).

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Advantages of a 0-Grade policy:

Teaches students that not doing your work counts for exactly 0.
Teaches the importance of at least giving any assignment given, no matter the difficulty, an effort.
Lets the school system know (potentially) which students are making an effort and which ones don't give a fuck.

Disadvantages:

Teachers who don't adhere to the system in a way that allows kids to grow and learn from their mistakes, e.g. teacher giving a student a 0 because he/she didn't complete the assignment "correctly" in which "correctly" is arbitrarily defined.

Basically thats the only bad thing I can think of in a 0-Grade policy, a bad or indifferent teacher who is unaware or uncaring that everyone has a different perspective and learning ability.


I don't feel its the grading system that is the problem, its that the system of education in the U.S. is too rigid and seems to want kids to fit into a specific mold and when they don't conform to a certain standard those kids get labeled as "problem children" or "learning disabled" despite some of them having above average IQ's and social adjustment issues. Also teachers don't get paid enough to care and I feel strongly that the other side of that issue is the whole "tenure" thing where a teacher can work x-amount of years and basically become un-fireable because of "tenure" allowing the teacher to fuck-off and collect a paycheck. I still think teachers should be paid by both experience and merit, not just simply years in the trenches.
There's a lot more wrong with the education system, but a way to start off is by allowing teachers to explore different methods of getting students interested in their education rather than forcing them to work by "standards" that hold some students back thereby bringing the education system down.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Count me among those who say it's mostly a cultural divide. Here in America, the right wing routinely denigrates the "academics" and "intelligentsia". They try to pry critical thinking from the curriculum because people keep arriving at the "wrong" conclusions whenever they think critically. It's a backwards approach leading us down the path of ignorance and ineptitude, and I'm not sure there's any way to pull us out of it. I mean you'd have to think and act critically and intelligently in order to solve the problem itself, so...

 

[dystopiaINC]

I Had a certain strain of this bullcrap in high school but it was only in the maths and sciences and they started it in my 3rd year by the 4th they wanted to expand it to English and I think history.

the basic Idea was you could get in all your work at any time but if you were missing to many assignments you got this f**king 'I' for Incomplete instead of your actual grade, and if you didn't get enough assignments turned it your grade wasn't counted at the end of the year. didn't matter if you just skipped out on the home work but passed all the tests with flying colors. I almost failed my 4 classes for late homework on subjects I went on to get A's on the tests.

The fact that homework is even part of your grade baffles me. Surely anyone can do your homework for you where as a test is under controlled conditions?

When i was at school (scotland) all of our grades where based on an exam at the end of the course which was under controlled conditions. Homework for us was just a way for the teacher to know that you have an understanding of what you were taught and where your weak points are

Well yes, we had work all year round, and got graded on all of it like this:

Mid terms/Finals = 10%
Homework/Classwork = 10%
Quizzes = 20%
Tests = 60%

for most teachers that's how they did grades. some had differing values but that was the most common. what the "I" system did was not factor that zero in the missing assignment so if you had 5 assignments and missed 4 but got a hundred on the one you turned in your grade was a hundred* but you got a big old 'I' and if you didn't get rid of it you were pretty well f**ked. Now for me that was bad because even if you gave me a flat zero on ALL of the homework I would still walk out of that class with a solid 90% more often than not because I just don't have the patience to do 100 math problems every night on something I'm not struggling with, and if I AM struggling with it getting through a hundred problems at home on my own would be an all night marathon that would kill me.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Well the thing is there has to be a consequence for not doing your work. In the real world if you don't do your job you get fired (unless you go into politics). Mollycoddling students with this policy is not going to adequately prepare them for the real world.

 

[Ryotknife]

No Zero Grading Policy is essentially an education grading system that does not give zeroes for not handing in assignments. Instead, they are given multiple opportunities to hand in completed schoolwork, and are graded upon knowledge of the subject.

As I understand, Nordic European countries (like Norway) have been using this systems with great success. They are world leaders when it comes to teaching children.

On the opposite side, there's America's standard for giving zeroes and F's for unfinished work. They aren't even close to the top when it comes to education in First-World countries.

....are you sure that is the standard now?

I mean, sure it was like that when I went to school, but from what I hear from my sister who is a teacher they are not allowed to use red pens to mark up papers because "it is too traumatizing." If red pens are traumatizing, I can only imagine what a zero would be.

The education system in the US has changed drastically in the past 5-10 years, and not for the better. Not in the least.

As for the actual policy in question, it is really hard to recover from a zero. Sometimes there is a reason for being tardy or sometimes people make mistakes and forget. Adding a stiff penalty to a late assignment seems good enough. I know I personally suffered from an incident where I went from an A+ to C- because I was late (12 hours late to be exact, I had the time down wrong)

 

[Ihateregistering1]

For starters, I wouldn't advise simply comparing two or more country's educational outcomes with something as simple as whether they have a "no zero grading policy" or not, because there are many, many factors that determine why some countries fall so far behind and others lead the pack. That being said:

"No Zero Grading Policy is essentially an education grading system that does not give zeroes for not handing in assignments. Instead, they are given multiple opportunities to hand in completed schoolwork, and are graded upon knowledge of the subject."

Sorry, but I think it's an awful idea. When you get into the real world, whether you work for a business, the Government, or even if you run your own company, deadlines are a fact of life. If your Boss tells you to get a budget report to them on Wednesday, you don't get to come in Thursday morning and say "well I know I didn't get it in to you like you asked, but I know the budget details really well!". An ability to follow simple instructions is necessary in many aspects of life, and very much so in the job world.

That being said, I think it should be the individual teacher's policy to determine how they want to handle late assignments. I had teachers who took off 10 points a day for every day it was late, and I had teachers who, if it wasn't in by the end of class, it was an automatic zero. But again, in the real world, you're going to have superiors with different expectations and standards, and preparing you for things like that is part of what school is all about.

 

[lacktheknack]

Western Canada here.

All I know is that a local teacher was fired for giving a student a zero because the student handed in an assignment with literally no correct answers.

In my mind, this makes the system a horrible parody of itself.

Then the teacher was rehired at a different local school that does allow zeroes. Interestingly, not only was he hired with better pay, the school he was rehired at was ranked higher than the first one.

You also say that school isn't supposed to teach behavior... I call BS. School is supposed to help you succeed, and if you need to adjust your behavior to fit into the current system, so be it. A school that gives you a zero and fails you for not following instructions is a school that reflects reality.

 

[Yopaz]

As someone who teaches in the United States, I will say that you're comparing two systems and countries that are not comparable. I allow students to make up work across the entire grading period, as well as retakes on quizzes and tests, and I *still* have a high rate of failure at my school because students simply can't be arsed to make up the work.

This is part of the problem with folks pointing to other countries and saying "it's their policies that make them learn". No, it's not. It's the culture.

Mind if I chime in here? No response? OK, I'll take that as a yes (I am joking here of course).

I agree completely with this. We treat education as it is a sound science, but it's not. You say we can't compare the US system to the Nordic system and I think you're right, but I would say the same apply to the system at different schools. I've been to several different schools and the way things are organized is very different from school to school. Even 2 classes can't be accurately compared. To be a good teacher you have to be flexible and prepared.


I also don't think using Norway as an example is good, we're not really great.

These results are a little outdated, but I don't think I can legally show the results that are being released this year, but bear with me.

Spoiler

We rank as #9 in reading, but as we can see, we're only ahead of USA by a hair in terms of points as for maths and science we're doing quite poorly while USA is actually handling science better than us.

From what we can see Finland is amazing at what they do ranking second in reading and maths and first in science. You'd think they are on top of the world and being quite proud of what they accomplish. They are not. They want to crack the code behind the Norwegian system because of the social structures.

We shouldn't make comparisons because each class is a new challenge. Great teachers with great policies can have failing students.

I do think we shouldn't give grades from the start though since that puts a lot of pressure on the kids at an early age. We should also be careful when it comes to segregating students based on performances. I managed to go from failing grades to top of the class in a year.

 

[Zeldias]

Grading is pretty pointless, and I've found the skillset necessary to be an A student frequently has less to do with actual knowledge and more to do with time management and the ability to ferret out what will be acceptable and what isn't.

Schooling is important, but grading itself is just trying to quantify a process that is necessarily qualitative in nature. In addition to that, the grades override the actual information and learning process. Have y'all seen the way most student learn how to navigate and regurgitate with little to no understanding? I used to teach. It's nuts.

The only thing grading does is damage the learning process and inflict psychological harm. I skipped a grade as a kid, and wound up having trouble with math. Since I frequently got Fs, I decided I was bad at math, and that I hated it, which of course creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Then I started playing DnD, and realized that algebra is actually incredibly simple. This little anecdote isn't to say that everyone can be good at everything, but I certainly think I would've been a better math student if the educational system I was in didn't use grades as a way to gauge and praise. If I was allowed to fail and go back over it and work it out and try again, it's a lot more likely that I would've done better. But don't we already know by now that regurgitation-based tests don't actually breed learning? I thought we figured this out at the same time everyone figured out that the IQ test is racist and limited in nature.

I don't really like the idea of students getting away with not turning in anything, because part of learning is trying and fucking it up, but I am against the idea of punishing that same process.

 

[FalloutJack]

So I have a few questions for you:
1. What did you grow up with? (And where?)
2. What do you think of the no zero policy?
3. What do you think is wrong with the policy?
and 4. What do you think is right with the policy?

I feel that it's not as simple as pointing fingers at the grading system. Please, by all means, lay the blame in the other territories that are relevent: Bad teachers and knucklebrain students. They're there, and they need to be both prodded out of complacency and given proper attention. Now then...questions.

{1} I like in the U.S., thus they give zeroes for incomplete work here.

{2} Look, it's harsh, but I think you're also seeing it a bit black-and-white. I have had a few instances where the darn thing couldn't be completed as per deadline for various circumstances. In my case, it wasn't laziness because I have a decent work ethic. I was able to make the stuff up here. Some teachers understand, and some are assholes. HOWEVER, the people with oatmeal brains who can't complete their assignments and even balk at learning? Screw them. They deserve the shame. You have to embarass the lazy into doing what's expected of them because (suffice to say), we're not Norway. First World lifestyle makes people too comfee sometimes, and that means the brains aren't as stimulated as they should be.

{3} Probably the teachers who are assholes to their students. They don't do their job properly and at some point, you have to stop making excuses for them. If you let them put garbage in, you will only get garbage out, and their grading is shit. That's why colleges have little professor evaluations, to make sure the students don't think their instructor's an idiot.

{4} I think Answer #2 covers that point.

 

[Trueflame]

The American education system is complete and utter shit, and that is no exaggeration. But I think giving zeroes for late assignments, dropping a letter grade for each day it is late, or other forms of incentivizing timely completion are important in preparing children for life after school, where they will face deadlines, schedules, and responsibilities that simply can't be put off. It's one of the few ways in which schools here in the US actually do prepare kids for their future.

 

[Eddie the head]

What . The . Fuck . Seriously . If you don't do your work , or don't hand it in on time ( without a valid reason)you should get a 0. Why are we teaching kids it's okay to not so shit? What's going to happen when they at work and don't hand in their report on time? School is suppse to prepare you for real life.

Yeah because at my work if I had to do something and I didn't do it on time they just wouldn't accept it after that. No wait they would still expect me to do my my job, there might be a consequence for not doing it on time or doing it right, but they still want me to do it.

 

[shootthebandit]

snip

From my experience at school i can without a shadow of a doubt that the kids who "done well academically" at age 14 have now gone on to university whereas the others are now in some sort of unskilled employment or unemployed. There are only a few exceptions (such as myself) that were inbetween being academic and being vocational

My cast system is a reflection of the current system but the difference is EVERYONE gets a better education and NOONE leaves school empty handed. In supplement to my cast system adult learning needs to play a huge role. If someone went down the vocational route they can then go on to study academically once they are older and wiser (part time or full time) or if someone went down the academic route and at any point decided they didnt like it or couldnt handle the work then there should be a transition in place for people like this to enter the vocational path later on in life

You said that apprenticeships are awesome. Well this is simply an early entry apprenticship which gives children a practical real-world skillset meaning they can walk into a job in that field (or possibly multiple fields with little to no OJT (on job training) required. This means employers will benefit from the system too especially small local garages and builders (just a few of many examples) who otherwise wouldnt consider hiring and training a school leaver

You say cast system as if there is some sort of stigma behind the "working" class. This is not the case, both systems provide a different form of training that doesnt make one system "better" than the other. The reason i say "academically bright" is because i think it would be unfair putting someone through an academic system that inevitably they arent going to succeed in. This also means that both academic and vocational class sizes are halved meaning the teacher to student ration doubles (thus improving the quality of learning)

As i mentioned before there needs to be a bigger focus on adult learning (school isnt the be all and end all) and there also needs to be a bigger focus on vocational learning. The stigma behind both of these types of schooling needs to change. Someone who does a vocational course shouldnt be percieved as a "high school drop out" and adult learning shouldnt be perceived as "30 year old illiterate"

 

[Seydaman]

1. What did you grow up with? (And where?)
I grew up with the zero grading, in New England, Massachusetts. I attended public school up until grade ten (I dropped after the first semester), before attending a therapeutic school for grades eleven and twelve.

2. What do you think of the no zero policy?
On one hand, I can see how it would reduce anxiety and focus more on the actual knowledge attained. However, part of education is learning to function with things like deadlines which are all too real everywhere else. You can't stall on a project because it needs to be done right now.

However, you said that Nordic countries have great success in their education, so, it would seem that the positive effects of the system outweigh the potential negatives, in so far as I can tell.

3. What do you think is wrong with the policy?
I feel that allowing someone to not do something isn't a great way to prepare them for life where they more or less will have to do shit that they hate or find extremely challenging.

4. What do you think is right with the policy?
I like how it focuses on the actual knowledge and not meeting deadlines.

I'd probably support a gradual introduction of this policy into the American education system, and observe how it affects us. If it shows positive results, make it a standard.