Are fourth-graders too young to fail?

[Polk]

Honest question:

At what point do the elementary school start assigning grades and percentages? Its been a while since I looked through my old report cards, and my son is only in pre-school, but I seem to recall that report cards were marked based on progress up until a certain point, i.e. no A,B,C,D,F ratings, but instead "Exceptional", "Satisfactory", "Unsatisfactory", "Needs Improvement".

I'm not up on learning theory at the elementary level, so I'm not sure you're supposed to even assign grades at that point.

In my school, it started in kindergarten.

 

[Amanda]

I'm not sure it really matters much. If kids come out of school with basic skills like reading and basic math, and have accepted the conditioning to bow to authority, I'd say public school accomplished what it set out to do.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Prevented from flunking her students, Sheila Goudeau of Louisiana is suing local school officials in East Baton Rouge for interfering with her duties as a teacher. Goudeau, a 20-year veteran instructor who teaches fourth-graders, alleges in her lawsuit that Shilonda Shamlin, the principal of Riveroaks Elementary School, ordered the faculty to not grade lower than 60%, in effect a “D.” She claims the restriction is a violation of a state law that forbids administrative and school board officials from influencing or altering grades given out by teachers.

Goudeau, who is now teaching at a different school, further claims that “illegal alteration of students’ grades misled the affected students and their parents into thinking they were passing and obtaining the required skills to proceed to fifth grade, when in reality those students were neither passing nor obtaining the requisite skills needed for the fifth grade.”

AllGov - News - Baton Rouge Teacher Sues for the Right to Give Students ?F?s

Another dirty little secret makes the paper... Good luck Sheila.

Many, many schools do not allow grades lower than a 60. Anyone see a problem with that?

In my graduate school, no one ever gets an F unless they point blank just don't show up for class period.

Its different though, because the grading scale doesn't mean the same. Due to the way funding is provided for students, namely, the requirement that a 3.0 is kept, an 'C' is effectively a failing grade, a 'B' a pass grade, and a 'A' a high pass grade, and the professors (except one guy who holds on to the old scale at detriment to his students) know this and grade according to it.


I should point out though that as far as percentage correct on test, 60 is generally at least a B

 

[syrenn]

Passing the idiots along has been going on for as long as I can remember. It was a size and age thing. You didn't want a 15 year old in with the forth graders.

As I see it the problem came along with the "no child left behind" policy. If students are "failing" then the schools didn't get funding.

The problem is that the bar of "passing" has be lowered so much that I cant understand how anyone is failing.

 

[standunited]

Not in my school district where I teach. In this district 45% is a PASSING GRADE!

 

[syrenn]

Not in my school district where I teach. In this district 45% is a PASSING GRADE!

Please say you joking.

 

[Foxfyre]

Many of the one-room school houses of the past provided excellent education. Maybe it isn't for all kids, but the advantage was that the student who excelled in reading or reading or geography could advance through the grades in those subjects without leaving their social group, and often the more gifted kids were then put to work tutoring the slower students one on one. In First Grade reading was my thing so I often got to work with the kids who weren't catching on quite as quickly. This helped most children gain a legitimate passing grade.

If they did not, there was no hesitation to hold back a kid beginning in First Grade. Those of us who made the grades knew we had earned them. There is no greater self esteem booster for children than succeeding at something that was hard for them. And I think passing kids who haven't acquired a minimum proficiency is tantamount to child abuse.

But between doing our own work, tutoring others, and being offered opportunities to legitimately earn extra credit, we did get a good education. Those who didn't master enough work were held back, first through twelfth grades, without exception. But the expectations to succeed were effective and very few kids were held back. I think we had something like a 96% graduation rate our senior year? It is the only way to do do it.

My kids were blessed with a highschool designed on the one-room schoolhouse model. Students started at the bottom in each subject but with opportunity to study ahead. As soon as they felt ready to take and pass the qualifying test, assuming they passed it, they were advanced to the next pod. So sometimes you had gifted sophomores in the same class with juniors and seniors in any given subject, but it did allow the students to advance as they were able and not be held back by slower students. It also generated some healthy competition among the better students to see who could complete the work and advance the quickest.

Students who did not achieve a certain level did not advance to junior or senior until they had achieved it. And only those who had passed the minimum senior requirements were graduated. Everybody else had to stay in school until they did or quit.

My kids and their classmates were as prepared for college as any kids could be.

Expect kids to accomplish and excel and they will. Almost every single time. There is simply no other way to do education competently.

 

[Samson]

AllGov - News - Baton Rouge Teacher Sues for the Right to Give Students ?F?s

Another dirty little secret makes the paper... Good luck Sheila.

Many, many schools do not allow grades lower than a 60. Anyone see a problem with that?

Apparently if her students are making a "D" grade she not doing a good job teaching. maybe the school should look into replacing her.

I wouldn't say that. There are a lot of kids that just aren't interested in learning. You could put the best teacher in the world up there and get nothing but terrible marks.

Of course not all kids are "interested in learning."

If they were, then there really wouldn't be any need for teachers.

The teacher's job is to find how making what they are teaching interesting for each individual.

 

[Samson]

My children's elementary school did not assign grades. They graded the papers with percentages but wrote a narrative and provided parents with a portfolio of their work. I liked that but many parents did not. The problem with this kind of assessment was that the high schools would only use the standardized test scores for placement.

The high school where my brother teaches started the "no lower than 60" rule a few years ago. He said doing grades was like playing a video game on his computer. If a student with a 0 got a 60, then shouldn't the kid with a 60 get a 120?

But the bigger issue with the OP, is social promotion. As a high school teacher, we are constantly asking "how the hell did this kid get into the 9th grade"? Well we all know the answer, but how long do you keep a kid in the 4th grade?

A lot of teachers refuse to comprehend the "no lower than 60 rule." I've heard the silly "kid with a 60 should get a 120" reply. I get so fucking tired of these knuckleheads who believe that kids are motivated to make higher grades when they receive "0's." They should all get the hell out of teaching, they are so fucking out-of-touch with reality.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Nope, we should start early to make sure they have learned the most and to be able to remain the worlds only super power. Anything else is cutting our own throats.

 

[Samson]

Nope, we should start early to make sure they have learned the most and to be able to remain the worlds only super power. Anything else is cutting our own throats.

Shit.

Ok, I admit: there ARE people who should be given "0's."

 

[Foxfyre]

Nope, we should start early to make sure they have learned the most and to be able to remain the worlds only super power. Anything else is cutting our own throats.

Shit.

Ok, I admit: there ARE people who should be given "0's."

It depends. I suppose never receiving a passing grade might convince a child that he or she simply was incapable of acheiving one. Or he or she would simply give up.

But a gifted teacher believes the kids can learn and insists that they do so. He or she makes them believe that they can by rewarding and praising honest achievement and letting the kids know that they are capable of doing good work. Such children know that a zero is not an indictment of them, but in their lack of effort. And it can be an incentive to work harder to not further earn such consequences.

I've received zeros on tests when I goofed off instead of studying and thought I would be able to cram for 15 minutes before class and would bluff my way through the quiz. That big fat zero was evidence of my poor choices though and I would then work extra hard to earn B+ and A on subsequent tests to get my gradepoint average back up.

 

[Samson]

Nope, we should start early to make sure they have learned the most and to be able to remain the worlds only super power. Anything else is cutting our own throats.

Shit.

Ok, I admit: there ARE people who should be given "0's."

It depends. I suppose never receiving a passing grade might convince a child that he or she simply was incapable of acheiving one. Or he or she would simply give up.

I meant that Matthew's post deserved a "0."

In school a "0" shouldn't be given. I'd list the reasons, but if someone needs the list, then they probably aren't worth the time and effort it would take to put it together.

That big fat zero was evidence of my poor choices though and I would then work extra hard to earn B+ and A on subsequent tests to get my gradepoint average back up

I assume you would have worked just as hard in the future had you received a "50" on the test?

Or, would you have said, "ah, I'm really happy with the 50, and I think I'll just blow off future assignments so that my average will be a 50!! After all, a 50 is much better than 0!!"

 

[Foxfyre]

Shit.

Ok, I admit: there ARE people who should be given "0's."

It depends. I suppose never receiving a passing grade might convince a child that he or she simply was incapable of acheiving one. Or he or she would simply give up.

I meant that Matthew's post deserved a "0."

In school a "0" shouldn't be given. I'd list the reasons, but if someone needs the list, then they probably aren't worth the time and effort it would take to put it together.

That big fat zero was evidence of my poor choices though and I would then work extra hard to earn B+ and A on subsequent tests to get my gradepoint average back up

I assume you would have worked just as hard in the future had you received a "50" on the test?

Or, would you have said, "ah, I'm really happy with the 50, and I think I'll just blow off future assignments so that my average will be a 50!! After all, a 50 is much better than 0!!"

The thing is Samson, kids aren't stupid. They know when they're being patronized. And they know when they have to earn something honestly and legitimately or when they're just going through the motions. And they aren't all that different from adults in how they are motivated. If they have to put in a certain amount of effort to earn a grade, they expect to put in a certain amount of effort to get it. If they get the grade whether they put any effort into it or not, many won't bother to put any effort into it.

If they don't get any questions right, they don't deserve to get the same credit as if they did. If they are going to pass whether or not they learn the material, many will conclude why bother?

What would getting 50% on a test in which I answered every question wrong say to me? That if I put in 50% effort I could get a 100%? And then what does 100% mean to those kids who actually earned it?

We don't do kids any favors by shaming or ridiculing them and no teacher should do that to his/her students. But we sure as hell don't do them any favors by rewarding them for failing effort either. I see the results of that all the time with young people who are barely literate and can't even make change for a dollar and are likely stuck in dead end jobs forever. But they have a highschool diploma. And to me that is criminal.

 

[Samson]

It depends. I suppose never receiving a passing grade might convince a child that he or she simply was incapable of acheiving one. Or he or she would simply give up.

I meant that Matthew's post deserved a "0."

In school a "0" shouldn't be given. I'd list the reasons, but if someone needs the list, then they probably aren't worth the time and effort it would take to put it together.

That big fat zero was evidence of my poor choices though and I would then work extra hard to earn B+ and A on subsequent tests to get my gradepoint average back up

I assume you would have worked just as hard in the future had you received a "50" on the test?

Or, would you have said, "ah, I'm really happy with the 50, and I think I'll just blow off future assignments so that my average will be a 50!! After all, a 50 is much better than 0!!"

The thing is Samson, kids aren't stupid. ...
If they don't get any questions right, they don't deserve to get the same credit as if they did. If they are going to pass whether or not they learn the material, many will conclude why bother?

What would getting 50% on a test in which I answered every question wrong say to me? That if I put in 50% effort I could get a 100%? And then what does 100% mean to those kids who actually earned it?

Well, you're quite right: They aren't stupid.

However, they aren't terribly industrious either. You are characterizing kids like adults. They aren't adults. Sure, some are more mature than others.

First, wringing your hands worrying over the "meaning of a grade" for the kids that make 100's is pretty damn silly. They view anything below a 90 as unacceptable, and see no difference between a 0 and a 50. They could care less what anyone else makes, or why they made it, if they made 100.

Obviously, you haven't made very may bad grades if you think if kids receive a 50 for nothing then they'll think they'll get a 100 for a 50.

But, the interesting question is, what if one kid legitamately gets half the answers correct, and another gets nothing correct, but they BOTH get a 50?? How is this "Fair?"

Enter The Curve.

The problem with giving a "0" is that for most kids it says "You Cannot Do Any Worse." Once they maye several "0'S" their average cannot raise above 65. As you say, they aren't stupid: Once they cannot do ANYTHING to raise the average, then they quit trying: They know that either they go to summer school with a 64 average, or a 14, 24, 34, 44, 54 average.

Once they quit trying, so do their parents.

Then you'll only have a discipline problem in the class.

We don't do kids any favors by shaming or ridiculing them and no teacher should do that to his/her students. But we sure as hell don't do them any favors by rewarding them for failing effort either. I see the results of that all the time with young people who are barely literate and can't even make change for a dollar and are likely stuck in dead end jobs forever. But they have a highschool diploma. And to me that is criminal.

Criminal is some asshole teacher who buried a kid with 0's until they dropped out to BECOME a CRIMINAL.

If you think the worst thing a kid can end up with is a highschool diploma, and a "dead end job" where they cannot make change, you're livin' high on the hog.

 

[Foxfyre]

I meant that Matthew's post deserved a "0."

In school a "0" shouldn't be given. I'd list the reasons, but if someone needs the list, then they probably aren't worth the time and effort it would take to put it together.



I assume you would have worked just as hard in the future had you received a "50" on the test?

Or, would you have said, "ah, I'm really happy with the 50, and I think I'll just blow off future assignments so that my average will be a 50!! After all, a 50 is much better than 0!!"

The thing is Samson, kids aren't stupid. ...
If they don't get any questions right, they don't deserve to get the same credit as if they did. If they are going to pass whether or not they learn the material, many will conclude why bother?

What would getting 50% on a test in which I answered every question wrong say to me? That if I put in 50% effort I could get a 100%? And then what does 100% mean to those kids who actually earned it?

Well, you're quite right: They aren't stupid.

However, they aren't terribly industrious either. You are characterizing kids like adults. They aren't adults. Sure, some are more mature than others.

First, wringing your hands worrying over the "meaning of a grade" for the kids that make 100's is pretty damn silly. They view anything below a 90 as unacceptable, and see no difference between a 0 and a 50. They could care less what anyone else makes, or why they made it, if they made 100.

Obviously, you haven't made very may bad grades if you think if kids receive a 50 for nothing then they'll think they'll get a 100 for a 50.

But, the interesting question is, what if one kid legitamately gets half the answers correct, and another gets nothing correct, but they BOTH get a 50?? How is this "Fair?"

Enter The Curve.

The problem with giving a "0" is that for most kids it says "You Cannot Do Any Worse." Once they maye several "0'S" their average cannot raise above 65. As you say, they aren't stupid: Once they cannot do ANYTHING to raise the average, then they quit trying: They know that either they go to summer school with a 64 average, or a 14, 24, 34, 44, 54 average.

Once they quit trying, so do their parents.

Then you'll only have a discipline problem in the class.

We don't do kids any favors by shaming or ridiculing them and no teacher should do that to his/her students. But we sure as hell don't do them any favors by rewarding them for failing effort either. I see the results of that all the time with young people who are barely literate and can't even make change for a dollar and are likely stuck in dead end jobs forever. But they have a highschool diploma. And to me that is criminal.

Criminal is some asshole teacher who buried a kid with 0's until they dropped out to BECOME a CRIMINAL.

If you think the worst thing a kid can end up with is a highschool diploma, and a "dead end job" where they cannot make change, you're livin' high on the hog.

And if you think that kids should be made to believe that they did enough to earn a highschool diploma when they didn't do enough to get out of fourth grade, you are selling those kids way short. If you think they shouldn't be taught to aspire for more than that 'dead end job' and not being able to make change, you're doing them a huge disservice.

I grew up in a school system that a zero meant you didn't do any of the work. We weren't proud of it by any means, but our little psyches were not irreparably wounded either. We were sufficiently embarrassed to do more to get ready for the next quiz. And I had parents who made it possible to participate in a lot of stuff, but who took almost no interest in that stuff. I give great teachers all the credit for my quite adequate education.

A 30% meant you got 3 out of 10 questions right. A 50% meant you goofed off too much, didn't get it done and you need to work harder. A 90% was a sigh of relief because you got your "A" but still you wanted that 100% just to prove you could do it. And we graduated 96% of the senior class with sufficient skill sets to make it as adults doing pretty much whatever we wanted to do. Not a dud in the lot. (All but one of the other 4% graduated in a year or less later.)

I know times have changed since then and we exist in a different culture. But I still value excellence in all things and I think kids pointed in the right direction do also. And they know the difference between actually learning something and getting a pass without learning it.

 

[Samson]

I know times have changed since then and we exist in a different culture. But I still value excellence in all things and I think kids pointed in the right direction do also. And they know the difference between actually learning something and getting a pass without learning it.

Well, you oughta try to actually apply that theory to 8th graders.

I'll bet you may even last a year.

 

[Foxfyre]

I know times have changed since then and we exist in a different culture. But I still value excellence in all things and I think kids pointed in the right direction do also. And they know the difference between actually learning something and getting a pass without learning it.

Well, you oughta try to actually apply that theory to 8th graders.

I'll bet you may even last a year.

Every now and then I tutor Middle Schoolers and High Schoolers in a subject or two in which I have a small degree of expertise. And I have been an Eighth grader. And I raised kids (and helped raise a few of their friends) and got them through Eighth grade too. But admittedly most of these are the motivated ones who do want to do well and do care about their grades and do want to get into a good college.

I don't envy teachers in the public schools these days because not only are too many of the kids being taught to not expect all that much of themselves but I suppose so are the teachers. I don't know how to turn that around but I know it has not always been that way. So there is hope.

 

[chanel]

Back to the OP - if a child cannot read or write in 4th grade, should he or she be promoted? The general rule of thumb here is no retention past third grade. Is that good policy?

 

[Samson]

Back to the OP - if a child cannot read or write in 4th grade, should he or she be promoted? The general rule of thumb here is no retention past third grade. Is that good policy?

Yes.

First, if a kid in the 4th grade cannot read or write, then they need a heluva lotta remediation. This is gonna be necessary in whatever grade they are placed. Why not let it happen in 5th grade?