How many of us want top-notch grades? Sure, that’s probably all of us, but how many of us who strive for A’s truly deserve them? Do we really retain what we learn in our classrooms, or do we all just cram and drop all the material we have learned the day after the exam? In the end, does that glorified “A” mean anything substantial to us?
Nine teachers and administrators, including principal Jeff Anderson, attended a conference on March 1 discussing two distinctly opposite types of students: students who put the effort in homework and study but cannot ace tests and students who can slack off yet score high marks on tests.
A hypothetical scenario was poised during the debate, a student taking AP Calculus BC who received A’s on all tests during that semester, but did absolutely no homework. Should the student deserve an A? This question left many teachers hesitant to respond.
The ideas of nationally known education consultant Rick Wormeli were the centerpiece of the discussion. In the hypothetical situation, Wormeli would support the student who understands the material and does not need to do the homework.
Wormeli encourages a test-heavy education in order to ensure students can truly grasp and execute the material. He also disapproves of the current American education system, which he says involves a “hidden curriculum.” The “hidden curriculum” is of the homework that gets full marks for effort, and the simple “tissue box extra credit” types of assignments that do not exemplify the true learning of a student.
At first glance, Wormeli’s idea may seem like an ideal system, where the student who scores the highest is the best. However, the issue is not that simple. As students, we sympathize with our peers who put in immense time and effort into their studies, only to receive less-than-satisfactory grades. But on the other hand, the students who are “gifted” and seem to naturally do well on tests should not be neglected for their talent. So what is the solution?
There are four main grading areas: projects, tests, participation and homework. The “ideal” curriculum would ensure that each student receives a fair grade based on their total academic performance as a whole, instead of weighing heavily on a single aspect of the class, which is in many cases, tests.
Too often a hardworking student who pays attention in class is weighed down by their weakness with taking tests. Should not this student be given equal opportunity to shine in the class, be it through something other than high test scores? Instead, they should be put on an equal scale with other grading factors, such as projects, labs and papers to give different students their own chance to show what they learned.
Also, it is frustrating how teachers perceive true participation in class. There are a plethora of kids in a classroom, some more outgoing than others. Teachers need to know that participation points should not be based on how many times one can raise their hand in class, but the overall conduct and performance of the student.
Shy students who listen intently in discussions, but do not raise their hands often, should receive the same participation grade as vocal students who participate openly, but may not follow directions all the time.
The curriculum needs to be fair to all types of students to fit their needs. In part because tests are so heavily emphasized, many students resort to cheating. There are many other ways to evaluate students besides using tests while still maintaining a vigorous, yet manageable class for all types of students. With a balanced curriculum, perhaps teachers will receive fewer complaints about grades and still maintain high standards that ensure that students really do know the material.
