Another common letter or comment on blogs comes from employers. It goes something like this:
I run a business where I hire these kids. They are lazy and entitled and they don’t think they have to work hard. They miss work on a whim. If we give them zeros in school, they will learn to work hard.
I’m going to sound a little crazy here, but what if giving kids zeros is what is actually responsible for the work ethic described above?
Most of the young people entering the workforce right now are products of a system in which zeros are assigned. Very few schools have banished them, and those that have, have done so recently. So these lazy and entitled young people (employer’s words, not mine) are coming out of a system that permits zeros.
In case you didn’t already know it, I need to say it. Some teenagers are lazy. They want to get by with the least amount of work. Schools that give zeros entitle them to get by with the least amount of work. Students can still pass a course with several zeros. Their average will be lower, but it will remain a passing average. 52% is good enough for some kids. They’d prefer to take the zeros and the resulting 52% average than actually do the work. This system teaches them that work is optional. It teaches them that they can choose which aspects of their work they will do, and which aspects they won’t do. Do you see the connection to the comment above? No wonder they’re coming out lazy and entitled (employer’s words, not mine).
In the system I’m advocating, choosing not to do the work is not an option. I won’t let the kid opt out of an assessment that I deem essential. I won’t let the kid skate by doing the minimum amount of work. I get him to do the work. I teach him to meet his obligations. Will that kid end up lazy and entitled?
Note: Credit to my director, who brought up this idea in conversation yesterday. I told her I was blogging it. I did.
“They’d prefer to take the zeros and the resulting 52% average than actually do the work. This system teaches them that work is optional. It teaches them that they can choose which aspects of their work they will do, and which aspects they won’t do.”
This exactly describes my attitude while I was still in school. The further that I now, as a teacher, go down the SBG route of assessment, the less reason I can see for accepting zeros.
This epidemic of apathy and laziness is much bigger than whether or not we assign zeros. It’s a product of societal complacency, and I’m not sure how it gets fixed.
I agree, Marshall, that this is a product of societal complacency. I also, feel however, that education must bear a responsibility in furthering this complacency in part. No consequence, is not a preparation for the work force. There lies the dilemma. Outside school, whether you are working at McDonald’s or as a doctor, timelines and an expectation of production exist and if that is not part of your world, you are out. The dilemma that resides within every teacher struggling with NZP, is “do I teach reality while teaching content?” The NZ and extended deadlines to June 27 with no consequence flies in the face of all that exists in the workplace. We are to teach skills and attitudes in most disciplines. The NZP is an acronym for a bigger ethical dilemma for most of us as teachers. It is not limited to zeroes.
Marshall, now we’re into it. There are much bigger assessment issues at play that whether or not to give a 0. I really hope the conversation moves away from that to what good assessment really looks like.
I’ll attempt to move the conversation further. I understand the importance of holding students accountable for the work required to pass a course. But here is my question and scenario:
In an NZP (no-zero policy), can you have a cut off date for an assignment? ie. if we will not give a zero because it is marking behaviour, should we still accept work if students are able to dedicate extra time to complete an assignment?
Scenario 1 – I had a student who never wrote a test on the day it was assigned. She always felt she wasn’t prepared and would sit in the library to study while the other students wrote the test. My efforts to get her to write at the same time as others were met with resistance from her parents. She had no extra curricular comments (ie. elite athlete) or coded learning disabilities. Why does she get an extra period to study in school when the other students had to study at home?
Senario 2 – In Social Studies, I give students a number of opportunities to write a response to a variety of sources based on current events. John completes 2 of 7, but hands in the remaining five at the end of the term. I have already marked the assignments for the other students. Should I accept the five assignments under an NZP, even though I have handed back the other marked assignments?
Some students need extra time for an assignment, but that is determined by the teacher or an IPP, not the individual student. Letting students hand in work or write tests when they feel like it is disrespectful to the students and the purpose of education. Also, an NZP can result in students holding off until they feel they have done their best work, which isn’t fair to those who handed it in on time but would have benefited from an extension.
I realize that in an ideal world, students could work at their own pace and would pass after they completed all the material required for a course regardless of their age. However, that is not the system we work in. So under an NZP in our current education environment, is it possible to have a cut off point where assignments and test would no longer be accepted for assessment? Or, how does the element of time factor into an NZP?
RSOldring, thanks for your comment.
I have students like the one you describe in scenario 1. My play is this. After she fails to be ready the first time, I assure her that that’s OK. I make it very clear to her that when she is ready, she will write a different test than her classmates wrote. Then I ask her to do the responsible thing next time around, and let me know before the day of the test that she is behind. I will work with her to have her ready on test day.
Your scenario 2 is tougher. Are those things that should be summative, or are they better off being formative anyhow? Could that student give you 5 more on the events that are current at the time he is finally getting to them? I don’t know the answers to those questions. I have been told that proper assessment (notice I never said NZP) is tougher in the humanities, because it’s harder to force kids to write stuff than write a test.
A couple of things.
“Also, an NZP can result in students holding off until they feel they have done their best work, which isn’t fair to those who handed it in on time but would have benefited from an extension. ”
If we shift our thinking away from everything else and focus on maximizing learning, there really is no defense against giving kids the time they need to give you their best. I totally get that there are other factors in play, but what is most important? Learning.
Also, I personally DO believe it’s defensible to allow a kid to get a passing grade, but not the maximum grade, if their work is late. That’s not necessarily the way I operate, but I do think it’s a defensible position.
What’s not defensible IMO is to stop learning in its tracks by giving the kid a zero that cannot be rectified.
I agree, and I would love to see the thinking shift. But in our current educational system this is not possible. As long as educational systems assume age = ability we are stuck with the importance of time as a factor of completion. Can an NZP work in a system that factors in time?
The high school project that is looking at the Carnegie Unit is looking into this right now. I’m most interested in the results. Should a student who could pass my final exam on day 1 of the course be required to sit through 125 hours of me, just so she can get the credit?
I also do not enter zeros and late work receives ful” credit. I believe my job as a teacher is to have students learn the material and prep them for college & Career. Allowing them to take a zero does not prepare them.
But I treat homework just like a job in the real world. If student does not have it done at the beginning on class I simply have them stay that day after school and work some math problems with me. I have a policy that I send home with students on day 1 signed by student and parents that lets me keep them after school (see blog link below for letter).
See my post on this subject at: http://21stmathteacher.blogspot.com/2012/08/dont-accept-zeros.html