I’ve been holding off on this one until I was sure I had said everything else I could think of about assessment. I’m at that point now. This is my last word on the subject. And it’s a long one.
I’ve been thinking a lot about why this no-zero thing is getting the huge media play it is right now in Alberta. It’s a story that won’t quit. 97% of the respondents to an Edmonton Journal poll are outraged and demand that we give 0′s to high school children. Stuart Thomson of the Edmonton Journal takes a stab at explaining the momentum behind the outrage in this fascinating piece. His take is that people are outraged whenever they perceive that someone else is getting away with something.
So what do we perceive that students are getting away with if we don’t assign zeros? Most of the general public (and a lot of teachers and students) believe, whether they even realize it or not, that the purpose of high school is to rank and sort students. Public perception is that we are inflating the grades of kids, which is unfair to the kids who get it all done on time. The public doesn’t seem concerned at all that a zero might artificially lower the grade of a student, but I’ve covered that topic to death in previous posts.
The public wants to make sure that the best and brightest become doctors and engineers, and they are right in this sentiment. But in their haste to condemn the student who is “gaming the system” by handing things in late or learning material later, the public is missing the point that we may be artificially lowering the grades of some of the best and brightest. I really don’t need the surgeon who got it right the first time. I certainly do want the one who got it right the last ten times, regardless of what happened the first time.
We have allowed the system of grading in Alberta to become a competitive one in which we reward and punish students with grades. At the same time, we have 100 possible grades we can assign to high school students, and the grade we assign has come to be too important and come to mean much more than it should. This entire province seems completely obsessed with ranking and sorting kids when the goal of education should really be to educate kids.
The understanding that they are being ranked is more evident in our top students, who are competing for scholarships and University entrance than it is in our struggling students. Most parents and the general public would probably agree that giving a failing student a second chance to improve his grade is probably a good thing.
Let’s look at how much these grades mean. The Faculty of Engineering at the University of Alberta has a minimum entrance requirement of 70%. But the quota is limited to 590 spots. Admission is based entirely on the high school grade, so in most years the minimum entrance requirement for Engineering is well over 80%. Let’s assume that next year that cut-off falls at 85%. A student with 86% gets in. A student with 84% does not. They’re only 2% apart on a 100 point scale. How different are those two kids in terms of their knowledge? That extra 2% is huge.
The marks that these students get in their high school classes are high-stakes for all involved (teachers and students). But here’s the problem. High school grades are imprecise, despite the perception that a 100 point scale means accuracy. An 85% in my class is not the same as an 85% in another teacher’s class. An 85% in my school is not the same as an 85% in another school. Despite that inconsistency, we attach incredible significance to these grades.
Again, we have allowed our grades to become high-stakes measures despite their imprecision. We don’t have a choice but to report percentages. Alberta Education, in their Guide to Education (P. 41) states clearly that high school marks “are to be submitted to Alberta Eduction in percentages.”
We (teachers, students, and the public) know that these grades are high-stakes, so we fall into ranking and sorting children. Just about every single poor assessment practice I see in schools can be traced back to this one issue. Here’s how each of the various groups demonstrates their belief that sorting and ranking students is important.
Students
Our top students are motivated by their grade. Their first concern is the mark they receive, when it really should be about the learning. They show us this motivation when they ask, “Will this be on the test?” or “Is this for marks?” When they get their assessments back, they look only at the mark. If it’s not to their satisfaction, they ask for a re-write even before they have looked at what they did wrong.
Parents
When parents ask me, “What’s the class average?”, what they are really asking is, “Is my kid better than most of the class?” Once, when I explained my assessment policy to parents on parent night, a concerned parent stayed after to talk. She was concerned about my belief that sometimes kids need second chances. Her daughter got near-perfect grades on every assessment I gave. Her daughter got these near-perfect grades the first time around. This parent didn’t come right out and say it, but her real concern was that by giving other kids second chances, I was closing the gap between her daughter and the rest of the class. Why would what happens to other kids concern her? Because in a competitive grading system, it matters. What if a child who got a second chance ended up beating her daughter for a scholarship?
Parents also seem to think I should be harder on late work. If their child hands something in on time, and I give another child an extension, the perception is that I have been unfair to the child who handed it in on time. The reality is that it had no effect on the child who handed it in on time. This belief seems to suggest that I should give higher marks to an absolutely terrible product that was handed in on time than I should to an absolutely brilliant one that came in a day late. What would be fair, here, is that I make it clear to all my students that if they occasionally need an extension, I will grant it. I want to see each child’s best work.
Teachers
As high school teachers, we know that the grade is high-stakes. This pressure makes us want to be as accurate as possible. I used to think that this meant I had to grade everything. I used to have 50 or 60 marks in my grade book by the end of an 80 day course, and I relied too heavily on the mean. I thought that if I had a lot of marks in my grade book, and the grade book spit out 84%, then I could stand firmly behind that 84% (and the resulting inability of that child to enter Engineering).
Because it’s so high-stakes, high school teachers are terrified to use professional judgement. We need the evidence, not some kind of touchy-feely observational data.
We also fall into the trap of placing more value on the first kid to learn it. A kid who learns it later on will have a lower mark. A kid who doesn’t do it will get a zero. It’s another tool that we use to stand behind our imprecise grades because we know, at the heart of it, we must rank and sort children.
I could go on and on outlining questionable assessment practices that are a result of ranking and sorting students. I’m not judging. I fully admit that I have done everything I mention above. It’s not the teacher’s fault. It’s because our system is broken.
The Fix
It kills me that we have reduced schools to giant sorting machines. Kids come to us in grade 10, and by the end of grade 12 we send them out into the world with a number stamped on them. Where’s the passion for learning? Where’s the enthusiasm for problem solving? Where’s the desire to foster deep thinking? The entire system is way too focused on the grade.
Two things will eradicate this problem.
- We need to move to letter grades in our high schools. Kids can earn only A, B, C, D, or INC.
- We need Alberta Education to fully fund each of those grades, as long as the kid was actually at the school. Quit paying schools only when kids get 25%. We work hard for all our kids.
Letter Grades
Letter grades like the ones I have above would represent some kind of standard which we would need to clearly define for teachers. I’m available for consultation if anyone in the ministry would like my opinion on it. I’ll do it for free. Some beginnings of suggested standards are outlined below.
A = Honors (or excellence)
I assume the Faculty of Engineering would select their students from the pool of A applicants. I’ll give my 84% student and my 86% student both A’s. How the University decides which of the A applicants they want to admit would be entirely up to them. I don’t know what makes a good engineering student. The University should. Maybe they use an entrance exam. Perhaps they ask teachers to fill out a form indicating how hard the student works. Maybe the ask the kids to build a bridge out of toothpicks. I have no idea, other than it shouldn’t be my job to sort and rank kids for them. I should teach my kids. My kids should learn. Let somebody else sort them.
I can be far more confident that an A in my class is equivalent to an A in another teacher’s class than I am that our 85%’s mean the same thing. An A in my school would probably mean the same thing as an A in another school. It’s a fairer way of assessing and it takes much of the sorting and ranking out of the equation.
B = Proficient
These are the kids who were doing pretty well, but couldn’t quite make the A standard. I hope a B in math would get students into programs that didn’t require math. I hope B wouldn’t close too many doors.
C = Adequate
This grade represents the minimum pass. These students have demonstrated that they meet our most basic requirements.
D = Fail
Do we really need to call it F? We can if we want. It means the same thing.
Right now we have 49 possible failing grades we assign to kids. That’s ridiculous. Does it really matter to a kid if he fails with 45% or 25%? I suspect it feels pretty crappy either way. To earn a D, the student would have to have completed our essential assessments, and demonstrated the inability to meet the curricular outcomes.
INC = Incomplete
This grade indicates that the student didn’t complete the course requirements. It indicates that we didn’t get enough out of the student to properly assess him. He might be able to meet the curricular outcomes, but we just don’t know. He will have to repeat the course. INC would need to be fully funded by Alberta Education so that we could use this indicator.
I suspect many people will point out that the D and the INC have the same outcome. They are right. In both cases, the student will have to repeat the course. I just really want to distinguish between the reasons the student is repeating the course.
Tou do not “assign” grades, students earn them. Do you want the heart surgeon who gets to your scheduled surgery 10 days late? As a teacher you are teaching responsibility of respecting a deadline too, this is a very important and valued skill in society.
Or would you want a doctor who saw you at 4:00 for a 2:00 appointment? We would never allow a doctor to get away with something like that, would we? Oh, wait a minute….
And naturally, no teacher would ever be so irresponsible as to turn in long range plans late, or return assignments weeks later, or fail to update IPPs in a timely manner. Unthinkable!
John, do yourself a favor, lock the comments on this one now.
You have hit the nail right on the head. The system of grading needs to be overhauled like this in Ontario too…ASAP. I hope they take you up on your offer to consult (in both provinces!). I think that what you’ve proposed here merits some serious discussion and consideration.
The only issue I have with your piece above is the idea that students who hand assignments in on time do not get harmed by allowing others to hand them in later. I disagree. Sometimes (but not always), the student rushes to hand things in on time and as a result, does not hand in their best work. I know that you say you allow students extensions, but some just won’t ask for or use those…for a variety of reasons.
I also think of those students who hand assignments in on time and then listen to the assignment being discussed by those still working on it and then come and ask for their work back to add ideas (which they might have heard or which the discussion they heard might have inspired in them). If that extra discussion doesn’t happen until days, weeks or months after the original due date, that student that handed things in on time will be harmed because they’ve likely already received feedback on their assignment…no additions/revisions could be made.
It’s a picky point, but I see it happen now as an intermediate teacher. I let my students hand things in right up until report cards are issued without late penalties. I’ve had discussions with students about late assignments they’re working on and seen the look on the faces of those students who met the deadline and have already received feedback from me on that assignment when they hear things discussed that they hadn’t thought of. It does harm them. Trust me.
As someone who started out frustrated with the idea of not being able to give students zeroes (yes, I called Mr. Dorval my new hero last week much to many people’s great dismay), this discussion has made me really rethink the way I grade and assess students. It’s got us all thinking about and discussing a system that in my mind really needs change.
Thanks for adding to that discussion with a reasonable implementable concrete proposal. Let’s hope someone in a ministry of ed is listening!
Thanks for contributing to the conversation, Lisa. I’m glad that you were open to considering other points of view. We’re not done yet with this, but I like where the conversation is moving.
Actually, we did implement a system like this in Ontario, only called levels 4,3,2,1 instead of A,B,C,D. The problem is, no one seems to quite get it, and few schools are actually using it as intended.
Great post.
I’m in agreement with John, the current system is broken. There’s no doubt that too many of our students spend their time worrying about their grades, their “core” courses, and how they compare to other students in the class.
In the era before William Farish (re)invented grades, a student was considered ready for a particular program or further course of study when their teacher said they were. In essence you had a reputation based system. It was flawed, in the sense that the bias of the teacher had undue influence on which of their students got to move on, but it had the advantage that students were less focused on a particular number, and more focused on getting to that ‘ready to move on’ state.
The first instance I can find of anything like grades being used is the Chinese civil service exam in the 6th century AD which was essentially a high stakes exam designed to sort students. The exam started out a reasonably rich experience for students, and over timed turned into a very rigid essay format. Deviate from the essay format, and your essay was discarded.
I’m sure that we can imagine other systems for grading that are more useful than our current system. Just because we live with this system doesn’t mean that it is the best system.
I’m with you, John. We need to make this happen for our kids and for our colleagues.
You nailed it, John. I hope the conversations that Dorval has sparked will end up bringing us closer to the vision you have outlined in this post. The heart of the problem isn’t whether or not we give zeros. The problem is that we are trying to quantify knowledge and skill with a number in order to rank and sort students. Its kind of funny how nobody likes the bell curve for assessment, yet it is a much better use of a percentage grade. You got an 84% if you did better than 84% of the rest of the class. Yet if we actually did this, the public would be outraged at the injustice of it. Ironic.
Thank you for your contributions to this discussion, John. I have enjoyed and valued your perspective.
While the topic is hot, I hope we continue to discuss it and make whatever change we can.
Perfect post! Hope you do not mind me sending it directly to our Educ. minister Jeff Johnson.
Thanks for the thoughtful post. I do think the INC mark is the way to go as opposed to the range of 0-49%. As a parent of two high school students, the thought of a zero because they did not turn in work makes me see red. I want them to do the assignment, late or not, do the work. It infuriates me that teachers won’t take the work late and kids become complacent enough to just take a zero. I will tell my kids go in and talk to your teacher and see if they will take the assignment late or perhaps there is some type of extra credit assignment… although I am sure some teachers offer these options, in my experience most will not. I am not opposed to some type of late penalty, but instead of lowering marks for late assignments, I would prefer to see additional work required. Simply not doing the work should not be an option.
Thanks for commenting, Lori. It’s great to hear from a parent. I firmly believe that we need to teach kids to finish what they start. The outrage at the notion I’m letting kids get away with something if I don’t give them zeros has surprised me. I’m glad at least one parent understands what I am trying to do.
While I appreciate the effort behind this entry–it’s reasoned, clear, and well-written–I reject the notion that assigning numeric grades somehow diminishes students. And think the parents concerns about how you assess resubmits is rooted in a basic sense of fairness: if a student who does poorly can resubmit work and get, for example, 100%, then EVERY student should be allowed to resubmit EVERY assignment (at least once) if their grade could improve.
You are producing yet another generation of young people who think “a do-over” is always on offer in life, that doing work to standard on time isn’t importantt, and that knowing that in some respects their peers are better at some things is mean-spirited.
I shudder to think about the future. How do you incentivize hard work and excellence?
You’ve made an assumption here. “How do you incentivize hard work and excellence” implies that this is necessary. For many people, children included, hard work and excellence are themselves powerful incentives. For people who need a reward for doing hard work, or producing excellent work, when you remove the incentive, they stop producing hard work and excellent work, which is disastrous.
Also, I see nothing in John’s post to suggest that numeric grades diminishes students, this is not his argument. His argument is that the grades become to focus instead of the learning. Many excellent students learn an enormous amount in our current system, but we also need to examine the system for unnecessary and/or undesirable gamification. Certainly numeric grades encourage a gaming of the system by students (and teachers/schools/parents).
Jawn, you are illustrating exactly what I am saying with your post. Every student wanting to re-submit every assignment to improve their grade is exactly what I am trying to get away from. If all they care about is the grade, then they are gaming the system because they know how high stakes that percentage is. I want them to care more about their learning than the grade. One way to do that is to offer them a smaller range of available grades. A student who got an A wouldn’t need to improve it. A student who got an 82%, on the other hand, might want to improve it to try to get to 90%. That’s gaming the system.
I’m with you right up until you suggest that the letter grade system would somehow solve the ranking and sorting problem. The problem isn’t that we haven’t got grades right yet, it’s that we continue to ask “how” to grade when we should be asking “why” are we grading in the first place.
And if these are baby steps on our way to abolishing grading altogether, than I think we need start giving that kind of full disclosure.
thanks for the post. Let’s keep this discussion going amongst those who normally have little to no time to talk about education.
Joe, thanks for weighing in here. I respect your opinion.
I’ve moved a lot in my assessment philosophy in the past ten years. I haven’t managed to get as far along as you have yet. I do see where you are headed, but I don’t think I’m ready yet.
I think the changes I propose are an improvement over our current grading system. Based on the public response over the past week, I suspect what I am proposing will sound far too radical to most of the general public. But if we continue talking about it, we may have a shot a initiating some kind of change. And the longer we talk, the better chance people like you have of continuing my growth.
I breezed through High School but hit a brick wall in my first year of Univ. Was totally unprepared for self directed learning and my profs didn’t seem to care that I was dealing with my Dad’s stroke that year as well.
One paper I submiited late because the typist I had contracted failed to deliver the finished copy on time … Prof wasn’t even going to accept it until I produced a note from the typist. My paper was graded an A but my mark was reduced to an A- (because it was late) … And I learned to submit my drafts an extra week earlier. Never missed a deadline after that.
No employer has ever asked why my mark wasn’t higher but they have benefited from the life lesssons that course taught me.
Scott, I have two thoughts after reading your comment.
1. You weren’t graded fairly. If your paper was an A, it was an A. You were cheated by that professor. You learned to comply. That’s all you learned from that exercise. Deadlines aren’t all they are cracked up to be. I will hire the engineer who got the A to build my bridge, even if it takes a week or two longer than he promised (and it always does). I’d much prefer that to the engineer who got the C and gets it done on time. A few months ago, I hired a guy to aerate and fertilize my lawn in the spring. He was supposed to do it by May 15. He came yesterday. I still had to pay him. Full price.
2. I think this must have happened a long time ago (based on the typist comment – I’m not saying you’re old). Universities have improved their flexibility. I took an undergrad course last year just for fun, and the professor was much more flexible on his assessments than I recall from 20 years ago.
I’m never sure where my dad stands on things like this. He points out to me that I’m in the minority in my opinion on this one, which makes me think he doesn’t agree with me. Then he sends me an email yesterday describing an extension he needed at the end of his undergraduate degree because he was so busy editing the University’s newspaper. He turned in his two theses 10 days late. They were accepted and graded and he got to graduate with his class. This would have been in about 1961.
In Vietnam, at least when I was growing up, we were ranked in every class — from 1 (top of class) to 30 (bottom of a class of 30 students). I’ve struggled with everything that has to do with grading in past 20 years in the classroom. The only thing that I can wrap my head around is having a checklist of mastery of whatever concepts and skills the colleges need to admit these kids. Then the teacher could write a narrative about the student that no grade (number/letter/rank) will ever replace. Thanks for continuing the conversation, John.
Hey, hey. I used a typewriter too in college. You did mean to say that Scott is old.
I am in full agreement with you John. As an educator it is my job to assess what a student knows. I have no problems allowing my students the opportunity to “re-write” any assessment I have given. I do however have two policies with my re-writes: 1) students must demonstrate to me that they have done something to prove their learning. This could be a wide variety of things including but not limited to getting extra help from myself or someone else (another teacher, tutor, peer). 2) The student gets the mark that they get on the second assessment even if they do worse. This really motivates the students to put in the extra effort and relearn the material. It also discourages those 84% students from rewriting trying to get the 90%.
Thanks for the comment.
100% agree with you on #1. I decide if and when a re-write is appropriate, and I reserve the right to deny it if I feel the student isn’t going to do any better anyhow, or is trying to game the system.
I wrestle with your #2. In an outcomes based system, I have absolutely no problem with dynamic grading and lowering a grade on a specific outcome on a 4 point scale. In our system of unit tests where the second test may test different outcomes at different levels, I’m not so sure. I’m still working on this one.
One thing to consider when student’s are submitting evidence of their learning is that you want your professional judgement to be credible. When you receive conflicting evidence, such as the case in your second situation, I think you would have to do a further assessment to verify the student’s consistency in achieving the objective. Once you feel confident that the evidence consistently reflects the student’s abiity, you can report on their achievement.
Alfie Kohn. 1998. Only for MY Kid. Read it and weep…
http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/ofmk.htm
Great reading. Thanks for the link.
Thank you very much for this article. I have shared it with my colleagues as we continue to discuss how we can use assessment effectively with students.
Thank you so much for an eloquent argument and a thoughtful explanation of why No-zero policies actually raise achievement. Like you, I was reluctant when first contemplating allowing rewrites or refusing to accept zeroes for my students. My fear was that students would game the system by never turning in formative assessments on time if at all. My second fear was that if I allowed late or rewritten summative assessments, students would never have a reason to turn them in “on time.” None of my fears materialized.
Students who do not want to work WANT us to give them zeroes; it gets them off the hook so that they can move on. The last thing they want is for me to refuse to give them a zero and expect the work. Yes, I hounded a few students for practice or summative assessments from time to time, but for the most part, students learned that in my class it was not a matter of “If they were going to do the work, but when” Most decided that it was simply easier and less stressful to just do the work.
This whole argument makes me think of how I would respond to my ten year-old if he refused to clear off the table when asked. It would never occur to me to let him off the hook (give him a zero). Heck no. He will clear the table because doing so is teaching him a valuable lesson about taking responsibility and helping out in a family. It’s about the learning.
I require evidence of learning to evaluate a student’s learning. There is no way around this.
Currently I am a school administrator in Ohio (USA) and would like to tackle this giant with my staff in the next year or so. A good staff read would be HOW TO GRADE FOR LEARNING by Ken O’Connor.
Fabulous post John.
Thank you for all of your posts on this topic, it has been very helpful for me to be able to direct people to your site here rather than having to refute all of their arguments myself.
I too hope that the discussion sparked by these events will continue and catalyse further educational reform.
[...] of what I wrote over the past couple weeks, I posted here, culminating in my assessment plan and my indictment of ranking and sorting. The Edmonton Journal and Calgary Herald both published this one. I wish I had sent them this one, [...]