APS Retake Policy change announced

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think people who say kids were “exploiting” or “abusing” the policy are somewhat incorrect. The policy was that kids were alllowed to re-take tests/summative assessments, and that’s what kids were doing. They were using the policy as stated. Aps should have been more thoughtful in their statement of the policy, but kids were not misusing it. Additionally, there were a few teachers who were not really using the policy in the spirit it was intended. I think teachers (adults) who are trying to game the systems is much shadier. For example- one teacher changed all of their tests to quizzes (which cannot be made up) and were say 98 pts instead of 100. Then they just gave one huge test at the end of the quarter. The “quizzes” were essentially tests- in the previous year they were but this year they were just “quizzes.” Or teachers who create a huge barrier of busy work that they will not go over or meet to help you with before you can re-take the test. The busy work has no bearing on learning- it’s just gatekeeping. Or a teacher who won’t let kids re-take the test until a month after the initial test to “see if you are really going to study.” I find this kind of passive aggressive distortion of the policy to be more egregious.

Additionally, I think the “there are no re-takes or do overs in the real world” reasoning is not true. Sure there are fireable offenses or people who make big mistakes. But people ask bosses for extra time or prioritize one task over another knowing that they can go back and improve the task that they back burnered. You can ask for an extension on filing your taxes. You can go to office hours at college and get help with assignments or talk about an extension in extreme situations. You can get an “incomplete” and finish a course later. You can take a course pass/fail. Life is filled with opportunities. It’s not as extreme as people are suggesting. The people who want kids to “understand the real world” are the same people who are walking uphill to school and back home🙄

Agree. However, changing "tests" to "quizzes" is not a problem per se. All those quizzes should be periodic checks and preparation for the quarterly test. IF the teacher and students use the quizzes properly, they would be using them to learn what they still need to learn and review and correct missed questions, etc. The teacher "could" give points for making the test corrections to help make-up for lower grades. But it should all be geared toward increasing understanding and optimizing preparation for tests. The problem isn't the policy, it's not implementing instruction appropriately.

Busy work without review or purpose, not meeting with students to give extra help, just "waiting and seeing" a month: all are purely lazy non-teaching. Unacceptable; but sadly not uncommon. It doesn't adhere to the policy, it doesn't adhere to the spirit of the policy, it doesn't align with the spirit of high-quality or effective teaching.

You have some good points about the no do-overs in life myth. However, those are specific and only "sometimes" opportunities. You don't get unlimited deadlines and retakes on everything all the time, as has been the practice in APS lately. You have to learn what things and when you might have a second chance are. And many of the examples you cite are not without consequences or effects. On the contrary, students are learning that it does apply all the time and there are no consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who say kids were “exploiting” or “abusing” the policy are somewhat incorrect. The policy was that kids were alllowed to re-take tests/summative assessments, and that’s what kids were doing. They were using the policy as stated. Aps should have been more thoughtful in their statement of the policy, but kids were not misusing it. Additionally, there were a few teachers who were not really using the policy in the spirit it was intended. I think teachers (adults) who are trying to game the systems is much shadier. For example- one teacher changed all of their tests to quizzes (which cannot be made up) and were say 98 pts instead of 100. Then they just gave one huge test at the end of the quarter. The “quizzes” were essentially tests- in the previous year they were but this year they were just “quizzes.” Or teachers who create a huge barrier of busy work that they will not go over or meet to help you with before you can re-take the test. The busy work has no bearing on learning- it’s just gatekeeping. Or a teacher who won’t let kids re-take the test until a month after the initial test to “see if you are really going to study.” I find this kind of passive aggressive distortion of the policy to be more egregious.

Additionally, I think the “there are no re-takes or do overs in the real world” reasoning is not true. Sure there are fireable offenses or people who make big mistakes. But people ask bosses for extra time or prioritize one task over another knowing that they can go back and improve the task that they back burnered. You can ask for an extension on filing your taxes. You can go to office hours at college and get help with assignments or talk about an extension in extreme situations. You can get an “incomplete” and finish a course later. You can take a course pass/fail. Life is filled with opportunities. It’s not as extreme as people are suggesting. The people who want kids to “understand the real world” are the same people who are walking uphill to school and back home🙄

Agree. However, changing "tests" to "quizzes" is not a problem per se. All those quizzes should be periodic checks and preparation for the quarterly test. IF the teacher and students use the quizzes properly, they would be using them to learn what they still need to learn and review and correct missed questions, etc. The teacher "could" give points for making the test corrections to help make-up for lower grades. But it should all be geared toward increasing understanding and optimizing preparation for tests. The problem isn't the policy, it's not implementing instruction appropriately.

Busy work without review or purpose, not meeting with students to give extra help, just "waiting and seeing" a month: all are purely lazy non-teaching. Unacceptable; but sadly not uncommon. It doesn't adhere to the policy, it doesn't adhere to the spirit of the policy, it doesn't align with the spirit of high-quality or effective teaching.

You have some good points about the no do-overs in life myth. However, those are specific and only "sometimes" opportunities. You don't get unlimited deadlines and retakes on everything all the time, as has been the practice in APS lately. You have to learn what things and when you might have a second chance are. And many of the examples you cite are not without consequences or effects. On the contrary, students are learning that it does apply all the time and there are no consequences.

I fully understand that quizzes can be helpful. But when a teacher gives an end of unit “quiz” and moves on to new content. And when students ask if it’s eligible for a re-take and the teacher responds “no because it’s a quiz.” I think we all know what’s happening.

Also, I think this is again falling into the myth that “kids today don’t realize the value of hard work” idea is over blown. Yes, above are some isolated examples. But I think the idea that the vast majority of kids that are re-taking are just kids that aren’t really working hard and just taking the easy way out is not true. Maybe at first kids were overly “re-take happy.” But kids can see a pattern with the re-takes. Kids will not continue to retake if they don’t find success. Kids will also see that they are continuously getting the same score even after retaking if they don’t study. They will course correct. I think what happened was that it was an increased workload on teachers that aps was not ready for. APS can sometimes be too knee jerk in their policy shifts. But instead of re-evaluating and trying to do what’s best for students AND teachers and make some tweaks like a better testing center system, mandating quality remediation and using lunch time math and English time more successfully and efficiently, they made another knee jerk decision and gutted the policy to the detriment of the students.

[Anonymous]

The initial policy was made with a cohort of teachers. I was on the elementary committee which only made minor changes but we were part of the drafting process and every teacher in APS was given the opportunity to comment on the draft as well.

I think the need for the midyear change was because of the drastic increase in workload caused by this policy at the high school level and that it was clearly being driven by students who were already performing at or above proficiency “B” level before the retake. My child who is an APS high schooler in AP and intensified classes included, was benefiting. The purpose was to bring up the lower performing students and the bulk of the workload ended up being students on the other end. Mostly those kids chasing A’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do they expect these children to survive college where there are No retake?

Not all children attend college, genius.

The point of school is to master material. This is good policy.

[Anonymous]

This constant rolling out of new policies is an embarrassment. No doubt the retake policy was immensely burdensome for teachers. But some of the problems got passed onto students via bureaucracy and sign up rules and different procedures for each middle school class stored in different apps and screens and password protected information. That’s so untenable from an ADHD perspective that it has become an issue with our IEP — these kids do not need more poorly constructed digital systems to get in the way of learning basic subjects. I’d be perfectly happy to tutor and manage my kid if I could just get a dang list instead of tears over poor UX every week.

Meanwhile the retake policy also puts pressure on the high flyers wondering if a low A is enough. Maybe that is what this adjustment is supposed to address.

[Anonymous]

I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

[Anonymous]

Most of the tests my kids take are online & scored right away (automatically). So grading extra tests isn’t a thing unless it’s an essay test. I suppose offering the remediation is the burdensome part for teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

Of course kids are retaking even if above an 80. These HS kids have been told since middle school that they won't get into a "good" college unless they have straight As. Take a journey over to the College board here and see people being told that anything less than a 4.0 UW knocks you out of contention for UVA. Of course, not all kids are headed to UVA or even want to go there, but imagine the stress of feeling like a single B has completely removed an entire group of colleges, regardless of how well you do in everything else? I don't blame kids for chasing As. They can't rely on homework (proof they are actually TRYING) to boost their grades anymore. Bonus: When they restudy and get those extra points, they've reinforced what they've learned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

Of course kids are retaking even if above an 80. These HS kids have been told since middle school that they won't get into a "good" college unless they have straight As. Take a journey over to the College board here and see people being told that anything less than a 4.0 UW knocks you out of contention for UVA. Of course, not all kids are headed to UVA or even want to go there, but imagine the stress of feeling like a single B has completely removed an entire group of colleges, regardless of how well you do in everything else? I don't blame kids for chasing As. They can't rely on homework (proof they are actually TRYING) to boost their grades anymore. Bonus: When they restudy and get those extra points, they've reinforced what they've learned.

If our goal is more learning then retakes are a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the tests my kids take are online & scored right away (automatically). So grading extra tests isn’t a thing unless it’s an essay test. I suppose offering the remediation is the burdensome part for teachers?

This was my kid's experience prior to 8th grade. The high school level math is not taken online and neither is all of World Geo or Science or English (at least not at our school). My child's math test are all hand written and hand graded and it takes a while for the teacher's grade to come back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

Of course kids are retaking even if above an 80. These HS kids have been told since middle school that they won't get into a "good" college unless they have straight As. Take a journey over to the College board here and see people being told that anything less than a 4.0 UW knocks you out of contention for UVA. Of course, not all kids are headed to UVA or even want to go there, but imagine the stress of feeling like a single B has completely removed an entire group of colleges, regardless of how well you do in everything else? I don't blame kids for chasing As. They can't rely on homework (proof they are actually TRYING) to boost their grades anymore. Bonus: When they restudy and get those extra points, they've reinforced what they've learned.

I completely agree! Kids are using every ALLOWABLE opportunity open to them to perform their best. Beside for a few gen Ed requirements in college, kids will have an opportunity to choose to pursue interests and skills that they are good at. In order to get into a top school, kids essentially have to be good at everything. All As in English when you are amazing at math and struggle in English. The retake policy let people improve and work harder at the subjects they needed help in so they could then get into the best school and specialize in their interests. This isn’t going to translate into college because they may never have to take a US history class again or calculus, etc. but you do have to get a good grade on it in High school.

[Anonymous]

This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

But your kid can still retake a 62 and turn it into an 80

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little sad about this, because my kid is the kid that the original policy was likely intended for - a HFA/ADHD kid in regular classes who tends to struggle with the faster pace of HS. He does well in some classes, but others like math and science, he really needs the extra help sometimes. It never occurred to me that kids were retaking at a 92. (I honestly thought the original grade had to be below an 80) Because actual tests are infrequent and maybe one or two a quarter, if my kid gets a 62 the entire quarter is a loss. The fact that he does pretty well on the smaller chunk quizzes and schoolwork doesn’t really count for anything.

But your kid can still retake a 62 and turn it into an 80

I think an 80 is low. It means you have to get a perfect score to even have a shot at a B. Most likely in retake you get a C at best. Not motivating to bother taking a retake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This policy is such a classic case of having a theoretical plan that goes wrong in the real world.

Of course the kids taking advantage will be the panicked A hunters. I agree with what a PP said. In this messed up environment, it is fully accurate that one B will blow your chances at a whole class of colleges. And they know it. These are very motivated kids and there are plenty of them.

The kids pulling Cs and Ds and failing and not getting the material who this policy was meant to capture and help. Are they really more motivated by this policy? Probably not much.

In my view this was all predictable, but hey they figured it out in the real world I guess.

Yes- it was all very foreseeable. But it was a policy created by the admin with teacher input (see above comment). I am shocked that aps made a mid year change that is to the detriment of the students. This will negatively impact the students. I think the lesson that kids are learning here is “adults will leave you high and dry if they get to do less work.” I think there could have been some structural changes that aps could have made that would have reduced teacher workload without changing the policy at the expense of students.

A nearby school district implement a very similar policy a few years ago. It was a complete sh!tshow the first year with a ton of extra work. But teachers worked together in their course content areas. All of the intensified chem teachers made one retake and then they took turns one day a week holding re-takes. So each teacher didn’t have to stay after every week. They only stayed after once or twice a month, and they didn’t have to make their own retakes they worked together. There are so many ways that aps could have made modifications. Of course, aps just listens to the loudest voices. The nearby school district did make changes in the summer for the next year. But no changes were allowed for the students. They had to keep whatever they said on the syllabus. The syllabus is a binding document that really cannot be changed, at least that’s how the nearby school district views it. I wish aps had the same honor and integrity to their students.