WaPo article on new grading system

[Anonymous]

I feel better knowing it's not just me

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/montgomery-parents-have-trouble-deciphering-report-card-standards/2013/05/27/5a9ed9d2-c187-11e2-8bd8-2788030e6b44_story.html?hpid=z4

[Anonymous]

You are not alone. I hope that they change it to something more meaningful.

[Anonymous]

The new report cards are meaningless. They seem designed to hide-the-ball rather than to demonstrate a student's progress. It is time for parents to wise-up to the implications of curriculum 2.0 (everyone is the same, work at the same level, all move at the same pace) and the new report cards (hide info from parents, make it look like everyone is "proficient").
Our kids only have one chance in this educational system. They deserve better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The new report cards are meaningless. They seem designed to hide-the-ball rather than to demonstrate a student's progress. It is time for parents to wise-up to the implications of curriculum 2.0 (everyone is the same, work at the same level, all move at the same pace) and the new report cards (hide info from parents, make it look like everyone is "proficient").
Our kids only have one chance in this educational system. They deserve better.

Please show where curriculum 2.0 implies that everyone is the same/works at the same level/moves at the same pace. Please also show that everybody is getting a P in everything (or even that almost everybody is getting a P in almost everything). Finally, please explain what you would consider a meaningful elementary-school report card.

[Anonymous]

Please show where curriculum 2.0 implies that everyone is the same/works at the same level/moves at the same pace. Please also show that everybody is getting a P in everything (or even that almost everybody is getting a P in almost everything). Finally, please explain what you would consider a meaningful elementary-school report card.

Not the PP, and no comment on Curriculum 2.0, but a meaningful report card would include some free form written description of my child's strengths and weaknesses. My child has all Ps. Once she got an ES in one category. Once she got an I in one (different category). I get the general gist of the report card is to indicate that she is generally on track but that's it.

Quite frankly, I don't care about "letter" grades in elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new report cards are meaningless. They seem designed to hide-the-ball rather than to demonstrate a student's progress. It is time for parents to wise-up to the implications of curriculum 2.0 (everyone is the same, work at the same level, all move at the same pace) and the new report cards (hide info from parents, make it look like everyone is "proficient").
Our kids only have one chance in this educational system. They deserve better.

Please show where curriculum 2.0 implies that everyone is the same/works at the same level/moves at the same pace. Please also show that everybody is getting a P in everything (or even that almost everybody is getting a P in almost everything). Finally, please explain what you would consider a meaningful elementary-school report card.

In our school kids who were doing different levels of math pre C2.0 have now all been moved to the same class. Within that class (and across the whole grade) there are only 2 groups for math. You are either "on level" or "on level with enrichment". Everyone is now at the same level, moving at the same pace. Previously there were at least 4 different levels for math.

A meaningful elementary report card would tell me to what degree my child is proficient -- proficiency is not an on/off switch. It would also tell me how far they are in progress. Currently, I could mean that my child has attained 1 out of 20 precursor skills to proficiency or 19 out of 20. An N can mean either that a subject has not been introduced or that it has been introduced but that the child is not making progress. A meaningful report card system would have identified assessments that are graded and shared with parents so that parents can see what their child is missing and why. If kids are being judge on "UCARE" in order to get a P, then each assessment would be marked with the components of UCARE. Also, a meaningful system would provide clear opportunities for kids to earn an ES. At our school the teacher acknowledged that no papers were provided to the kids for them to work and earn an ES. Students had only been provided with papers sufficient to earn a P -- all kids only had the chance to earn the same grade.

[Anonymous]

10:26 the change in distribution is what is key here. The target for P is 70%-80%. ES is meaningless and basically arbitrary. I and N show that a child is struggling significantly. Since the range for P is so wide, its quite useless to use to understand where your child may have strengths or weakness. Its basically pass/fail with the overwhelming majority of kids passing.

This system is terrible for kids with special needs. My DC has consistent Ps in everything. In terms of using the assessment, I basically all need to wait until he starts getting so far behind his peers that he gets an I or N. If the assessment system was more granular, I could see where he is dropping earlier and get him help in terms of studying or other techniques to learn how to overcome these issues. Special needs kids are often very smart and can compensate for their learning disorder up to a point. The key is to be able to identify that point and give them techniques to overcome it. If you wait until they start failing, its harder for them to catch them up and it creates a negative attitude toward school work.

The system is bad for academically motivated kids too. The teachers are only allowed to teach to proficiency. A child needs to do or show something random. If a child in one of our teacher's classes asked what is between 4 and 5, the teacher's response would be we are not learning that and they would be instructed to go back to what they are doing. Its unethical to have a grade that is arbitrary and that the students/parents are not informed on what they need to do to achieve it.

MCPS is just awful. I can't believe that we moved here for the schools. We really regret this choice even though we like the area in general. We're seriously considering moving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In our school kids who were doing different levels of math pre C2.0 have now all been moved to the same class. Within that class (and across the whole grade) there are only 2 groups for math. You are either "on level" or "on level with enrichment". Everyone is now at the same level, moving at the same pace. Previously there were at least 4 different levels for math.

What school was this?

At my elementary school, pre-2.0, there were two math groups (on grade level, and above grade level). Now there are two math groups (on grade level, and on grade level with enrichment). And while the two groups are officially at the same level, the reality is that they are doing different work, at a different pace. The only real difference I've perceived is that with 2.0, the two groups work in the same classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10:26 the change in distribution is what is key here. The target for P is 70%-80%. ES is meaningless and basically arbitrary. I and N show that a child is struggling significantly. Since the range for P is so wide, its quite useless to use to understand where your child may have strengths or weakness. Its basically pass/fail with the overwhelming majority of kids passing.

This system is terrible for kids with special needs. My DC has consistent Ps in everything. In terms of using the assessment, I basically all need to wait until he starts getting so far behind his peers that he gets an I or N. If the assessment system was more granular, I could see where he is dropping earlier and get him help in terms of studying or other techniques to learn how to overcome these issues. Special needs kids are often very smart and can compensate for their learning disorder up to a point. The key is to be able to identify that point and give them techniques to overcome it. If you wait until they start failing, its harder for them to catch them up and it creates a negative attitude toward school work.

The system is bad for academically motivated kids too. The teachers are only allowed to teach to proficiency. A child needs to do or show something random. If a child in one of our teacher's classes asked what is between 4 and 5, the teacher's response would be we are not learning that and they would be instructed to go back to what they are doing. Its unethical to have a grade that is arbitrary and that the students/parents are not informed on what they need to do to achieve it.

MCPS is just awful. I can't believe that we moved here for the schools. We really regret this choice even though we like the area in general. We're seriously considering moving.

This is not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10:26 the change in distribution is what is key here. The target for P is 70%-80%. ES is meaningless and basically arbitrary. I and N show that a child is struggling significantly[b]. Since the range for P is so wide, its quite useless to use to understand where your child may have strengths or weakness. Its basically pass/fail with the overwhelming majority of kids passing.

This system is terrible for kids with special needs. My DC has consistent Ps in everything. In terms of using the assessment, I basically all need to wait until he starts getting so far behind his peers that he gets an I or N. If the assessment system was more granular, I could see where he is dropping earlier and get him help in terms of studying or other techniques to learn how to overcome these issues. Special needs kids are often very smart and can compensate for their learning disorder up to a point. The key is to be able to identify that point and give them techniques to overcome it. If you wait until they start failing, its harder for them to catch them up and it creates a negative attitude toward school work.

The system is bad for academically motivated kids too. The teachers are only allowed to teach to proficiency. A child needs to do or show something random. If a child in one of our teacher's classes asked what is between 4 and 5, the teacher's response would be we are not learning that and they would be instructed to go back to what they are doing. Its unethical to have a grade that is arbitrary and that the students/parents are not informed on what they need to do to achieve it.

MCPS is just awful. I can't believe that we moved here for the schools. We really regret this choice even though we like the area in general. We're seriously considering moving.

At our school, if a child gets all questions correct on a 20 question math quiz, she gets a P. If she gets one question wrong, it seems to go either way, P or I. Two questions wrong, and it is an I. But virtually no ESs are ever given.

[Anonymous]

Our principal has stated in many public meetings with parents that math is an example where no ES grades can be given.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10:26 the change in distribution is what is key here. The target for P is 70%-80%. ES is meaningless and basically arbitrary. I and N show that a child is struggling significantly. Since the range for P is so wide, its quite useless to use to understand where your child may have strengths or weakness. Its basically pass/fail with the overwhelming majority of kids passing.

This system is terrible for kids with special needs. My DC has consistent Ps in everything. In terms of using the assessment, I basically all need to wait until he starts getting so far behind his peers that he gets an I or N. If the assessment system was more granular, I could see where he is dropping earlier and get him help in terms of studying or other techniques to learn how to overcome these issues. Special needs kids are often very smart and can compensate for their learning disorder up to a point. The key is to be able to identify that point and give them techniques to overcome it. If you wait until they start failing, its harder for them to catch them up and it creates a negative attitude toward school work.

The system is bad for academically motivated kids too. The teachers are only allowed to teach to proficiency. A child needs to do or show something random. If a child in one of our teacher's classes asked what is between 4 and 5, the teacher's response would be we are not learning that and they would be instructed to go back to what they are doing. Its unethical to have a grade that is arbitrary and that the students/parents are not informed on what they need to do to achieve it.

MCPS is just awful. I can't believe that we moved here for the schools. We really regret this choice even though we like the area in general. We're seriously considering moving.

This is grade suppression at its finest. I sincerely hope that they ditch this asap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:26 the change in distribution is what is key here. The target for P is 70%-80%. ES is meaningless and basically arbitrary. I and N show that a child is struggling significantly. Since the range for P is so wide, its quite useless to use to understand where your child may have strengths or weakness. Its basically pass/fail with the overwhelming majority of kids passing.

This system is terrible for kids with special needs. My DC has consistent Ps in everything. In terms of using the assessment, I basically all need to wait until he starts getting so far behind his peers that he gets an I or N. If the assessment system was more granular, I could see where he is dropping earlier and get him help in terms of studying or other techniques to learn how to overcome these issues. Special needs kids are often very smart and can compensate for their learning disorder up to a point. The key is to be able to identify that point and give them techniques to overcome it. If you wait until they start failing, its harder for them to catch them up and it creates a negative attitude toward school work.

The system is bad for academically motivated kids too. The teachers are only allowed to teach to proficiency. A child needs to do or show something random. If a child in one of our teacher's classes asked what is between 4 and 5, the teacher's response would be we are not learning that and they would be instructed to go back to what they are doing. Its unethical to have a grade that is arbitrary and that the students/parents are not informed on what they need to do to achieve it.

MCPS is just awful. I can't believe that we moved here for the schools. We really regret this choice even though we like the area in general. We're seriously considering moving.

This is grade suppression at its finest. I sincerely hope that they ditch this asap.

This first PP is totally incorrect. There is no correlation between percentages and standards based grades.

[Anonymous]

Bullshit. The goal is for every kid to be a P. 80% of the kids are getting Ps.

My child received mostly Os, a few Ss and a few Ns on last year's report card. The assessments all made sense and correlated to her performance on unit testing. Her teacher was able to show us where DD was having trouble on unit tests that led to an N. It was very helpful because she did have issues with that particular subject and test taking. DD worked on this area and was very proud when she received an O in the subject in later grading periods she was having a hard time with earlier in the year.

This year she has received all Ps and there is no unit testing. DD was disappointed and sad that she never gets ES grades in subjects she is very good at doing. She got an ES in other subject for doing something random which confused her more.

I've resorted to telling her that grades in this school do not matter. I don't even go over the report card with her. Sadly, I think this is the whole goal behind the new grading system. No one should care about doing their best, it doesn't matter. It only matters if you are in the middle and stay there. Anything more is a waste of the student's and the school's time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bullshit. The goal is for every kid to be a P. 80% of the kids are getting Ps.

My child received mostly Os, a few Ss and a few Ns on last year's report card. The assessments all made sense and correlated to her performance on unit testing. Her teacher was able to show us where DD was having trouble on unit tests that led to an N. It was very helpful because she did have issues with that particular subject and test taking. DD worked on this area and was very proud when she received an O in the subject in later grading periods she was having a hard time with earlier in the year.

This year she has received all Ps and there is no unit testing. DD was disappointed and sad that she never gets ES grades in subjects she is very good at doing. She got an ES in other subject for doing something random which confused her more.

I've resorted to telling her that grades in this school do not matter. I don't even go over the report card with her. Sadly, I think this is the whole goal behind the new grading system. No one should care about doing their best, it doesn't matter. It only matters if you are in the middle and stay there. Anything more is a waste of the student's and the school's time.

Actually, like one of the PPs, I don't think that elementary school grades do matter. And especially not grades for K-2.

In fact, I think that one of the advantages of the new grading system is that it foils the idea that you should do your best so that you get a good grade, and another one of the advantages is that it foils the idea that how well you do is related to how well other people do.