New grading scale for some schools in California means 50% is now a C

[Armada]

A new grading scale that redefines what constitutes an “A” or an “F” is causing strife and confusion in the Cotati-Rohnert Park school district. Some teachers and officials say it lowers the bar for student success, while others say it encourages students to succeed.

The new system is called the equal interval scale. Essentially, it makes it harder to get a failing grade. It departs from the traditional A to F scale in which students receive F’s for scores below 59 percent. Instead, the scale awards F’s only for scores below 20 percent.

“My mentor teacher, she’s not enjoying it. She’s got issues with it,” said Adam Green, a Rancho Cotate High School math teacher who likes the new system. “I respect her and I respectfully disagree.”

Under the new policy, grades rise in 20-point increments. For example, scores of 20 to 40 percentage points earn D- through D+ grades — and so on, up the ladder. Students get an A- for scoring between 80 and 85, which traditionally is low B territory.

Some teachers have tried to hang on to the traditional grading system but have been tripped up by a blanket new policy that students, even if they do not hand in homework or take a test, get 50 percent. Under the new rule, it’s possible for a student who skips a test to receive a better grade than a student who takes the test and does poorly.

 

“This is just incomprehensible. I don’t have words,” said Lanny Lowery, who has taught English at Rancho Cotate High since 1980.

To her knowledge, said Jessica Progulske, curriculum coordinator for student engagement with the Sonoma County Office of Education, Rohnert Park is the only district in the county to have implemented such a system. Some departments at Elsie Allen High School have a somewhat similar system, said Chris White, director of the Santa Rosa City Schools district office of curriculum and instruction.

Cotati-Rohnert Park school administrators say the change reflects a national movement to encourage students to strive rather than demoralizing them with low grades that make success seem out of reach.

“They’ve still flunked, but they don’t have as much to do mathematically to climb out of the F range,” Superintendent Robert Haley said. “It doesn’t eliminate the F; it doesn’t lower the bar.”

But opponents of the new policy say it does exactly that.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/4640349-181/rohnert-park-cotati-schools-rethink

Yikes, basically rewarding students to not go to school or not handing in their homework. 

[thejazz97]

We're not giving kids anything to strive for anymore. 

smh.

[Jägermeister]

California Schools

#CompletelyShameless

[RonMexico]

They could change all the letter grades to animal names for all I care.

[elvis15]

It's happening everywhere in some form or another. Students can't fail here either, even if the traditional scale remains. This doesn't help students not feel stupid, they still know when they have a low score, but it does keep them from striving to be better and be able to handle the real world (where if they fail they're out of work).

[Baer.]

Dumbing down of America has been going on for decades.

[inane]

Grades are dumb anyway. 

[Mimerez]

Well, C's and D's get degrees. 

[jmahyoung]

What is means is anyone thinking they would get less than 50% should stay home.

If you take the time to write the test you should get at least as much as a no-show.

Why not just set the grade floor at 0% for people who don't show up?

 

[etsen3]

Don't see how this encourages students to succeed.  I'm a huge believer in promoting self esteem among students, but this is an artificial way of doing it.  Accomplishing things promotes self esteem, not receiving false praise.  Kids aren't stupid, they know what's happening.  It's ridiculous that someone could attempt a test and fail, but if they don't even give it a shot they would pass.

 

It's up to the teacher to encourage students and inspire confidence in their abilities.  Students also need to learn how to accept failure and channel it towards future success.  Just because you get a low grade it doesn't mean you're stupid, it means there is room for improvement.  If students don't understand that, it's because the teacher hasn't created a positive learning environment.

[Tre Mac]

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/4640349-181/rohnert-park-cotati-schools-rethink

Yikes, basically rewarding students to not go to school or not handing in their homework. 

“This is just incomprehensible. I don’t have words,” said Lanny Lowery, who has taught English at Rancho Cotate High since 1980.

I am sorry but a English teacher is one profession that cannot use this line, ever.

[etsen3]

“This is just incomprehensible. I don’t have words,” said Lanny Lowery, who has taught English at Rancho Cotate High since 1980.

I am sorry but a English teacher is one profession that cannot use this line, ever.

 

If we're gonna play that game...

[Kragar]

 

Don't see how this encourages students to succeed.  I'm a huge believer in promoting self esteem among students, but this is an artificial way of doing it.  Accomplishing things promotes self esteem, not receiving false praise.  Kids aren't stupid, they know what's happening.  It's ridiculous that someone could attempt a test and fail, but if they don't even give it a shot they would pass.

 

It's up to the teacher to encourage students and inspire confidence in their abilities.  Students also need to learn how to accept failure and channel it towards future success.  Just because you get a low grade it doesn't mean you're stupid, it means there is room for improvement.  If students don't understand that, it's because the teacher hasn't created a positive learning environment.

It's sad and scary, but not surprising.  Lower the bar, take responsibility away from the kids so that they can do nothing and still get a passing grade.  Just another logical step from concepts like not keeping score in sports and giving out participation awards for just showing up.

The only good sign is that it is currently localized to one disctrict.  It's better to perform social experiments on smaller scales in case the proposal is a complete bomb.  There's still time for this to blow up on them, and they can go back to what it should be.

Sooner or later, kids grow up to learn that there is competition in real life.

[inane]

There is competition, but you don't get grades in real life either.

[Fanuck]

 

 

It's up to the teacher to encourage students and inspire confidence in their abilities.  Students also need to learn how to accept failure and channel it towards future success.  Just because you get a low grade it doesn't mean you're stupid, it means there is room for improvement.  If students don't understand that, it's because the teacher hasn't created a positive learning environment.

Typical, blame teachers instead of parents for not instilling the drive to succeed in their own children. 

Guess what, it's the administrators and district superintendants who make up the policies and the parents who are complicit - but hey, why not blame the teachers instead of the people who are really responsible. 

[etsen3]

 

It's sad and scary, but not surprising.  Lower the bar, take responsibility away from the kids so that they can do nothing and still get a passing grade.  Just another logical step from concepts like not keeping score in sports and giving out participation awards for just showing up.

The only good sign is that it is currently localized to one disctrict.  It's better to perform social experiments on smaller scales in case the proposal is a complete bomb.  There's still time for this to blow up on them, and they can go back to what it should be.

Sooner or later, kids grow up to learn that there is competition in real life.

It's actually worse than this.  Participation trophies at least reward effort, showing up and making an attempt to try something even if you don't succeed.  Whereas this system punishes risk taking.

This doesn't promote self-esteem at all.  This says "we have to dumb things down for you".  We should be saying "yes it might be hard, but you're capable of achieving it and we'll help you".

[etsen3]

There is competition, but you don't get grades in real life either.

The evaluating system may not necessarily be numerical, but it still exists.  And in many cases it is numerical.  HR departments use points systems.  Businesses use weighted objective scoring methods. Sports teams use points, etc.

The traditional grading system doesn't really fit more creative courses such as visual arts and music where technical ability and knowledge come second to self-expression (unless teachers know how to apply it in an open-ended manner) but even then the answer isn't to keep the same system and then lower the standards.

[MovesLikeDatsyuk]

All i know is if 50% is a C.. I woulda done not half bad in school.

[inane]

The evaluating system may not necessarily be numerical, but it still exists.  And in many cases it is numerical.  HR departments use points systems.  Businesses use weighted objective scoring methods.  Sports teams use points, etc.

Kids are not employees and shouldn't be treated the same, especially in elementary. 

[Chris]

Wow.

 

I wish somebody would step in and put grades back to where they should be.

A+ 100%

A 95-99%

A- 90-94%

B+ 85-89%

B 80-84%

B- 75-79%

C+ 70-74%

C 65-69%

C- 60-64%

F Under 60%.