Anonymous wrote:At Madison this las led to lower grades and tons of angst for the students. Each assessment can only receive an A, B, C, etc. and to get an A, there can be zero mistakes-my child has has come home multiple times with B grades where they have the right answer, but it will not be in the right format etc. Under a rational grading system, this would have merited an A-. So we are now expecting kids to get perfect grades in math at all times to get an A. If the goal is grade deflation, so be it. But I want all FCPS high schools doing this so Madison kids have a fair playing field against other FCPS stidehts in college admissions. I would be less irritated if they brought back A-, B+ grades on assessments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fs are not 50% at Madison. They go in as zeros. My kid has a few on practices and assessment and the 0 seemed to be averaged in.

There isn’t any consistency and I don’t understand how most of his classes are calculating grades.

The zero is related to a 4.0 grading scale. Not a 100 point grading scale though, correct?

But I want all FCPS high schools doing this so Madison kids have a fair playing field against other FCPS stidehts in college admissions. I would be less irritated if they brought back A-, B+ grades on assessments.

Anonymous wrote:Kids are compared to others at their school in college admissions, not others in their district.

Anonymous wrote:Kids are compared to others at their school in college admissions, not others in their district.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fs are not 50% at Madison. They go in as zeros. My kid has a few on practices and assessment and the 0 seemed to be averaged in.

There isn’t any consistency and I don’t understand how most of his classes are calculating grades.

The zero is related to a 4.0 grading scale. Not a 100 point grading scale though, correct?

Anonymous wrote:Fs are not 50% at Madison. They go in as zeros. My kid has a few on practices and assessment and the 0 seemed to be averaged in.

There isn’t any consistency and I don’t understand how most of his classes are calculating grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first page says it takes way more time for a teacher to implement and that it’s hard to raise an overall grade during the year. There you’ve got your answer that it’s a bad way of grading.

I'm not sure if you are aware of how averages work when you add more numbers to the set that is being averaged??? The fewer numbers (graded work) in the set (ie. earlier in the school year when there have only been 5 graded assignment), the more impact a new number has when added to the set. As the year progresses, you now have 35 numbers in the set that gets averaged.... so each number has less impact on the average, and it is harder to change the average as new numbers (i.e. graded work) are added.

That's not a flaw of skills-based grading. That's just a mathematical fact of averages over the course of a year. As you add more grades, it takes a lot more deviation from the mean to actually pull the mean in one direction or the other. It may be harder to INCREASE your overall grade in April, but it's also harder to DECREASE your overall grade in April -- because all of your grades up to that point have lead to the grade that you have (i.e. the average of all your work so far).

If you liked having quarter grades where each quarter was a fresh start -- you are essentially saying that you liked being mislead to believe that you were doing better at the beginning of each quarter, without knowing how that would impact your final grade. You essentially prefer to be ignorant of where you truly stand, and you liked the mirage. The rolling grade book gives you the most up-to-date information on what your kid's grade is at any point in the year. Some people like those fun-house-mirrors what make you look skinnier than you are --- that's kind of what quarter grading is vs. the reality of rolling grade book. Which-- by the way -- is NOT the same as skills based grading. Those are two different issues.

If you are going to argue against something -- try to make an argument that is legitimate.

I don't see it that way. The rolling gradebook is another issue we aren't discussing so it doesn't contribute to this discussion. This discussion is on the elimination of smaller assignments and only focusing on several heavily weighted grades. The practice assignments used to be about 20% of the grade and they worked to help the child do better on the final assessment. So they were both a grade* 20% of the final grade averaged or a grade contributing to homework and a means to achieve a higher score on the final assessments. In this way perhaps they contributed to the 20% of the grade and also let's say 50% of the final assessment grade because if you do this work and do it well, you likely will do well on the final assessment.

In the previous grading example, Child A gets a B (3.0) on the 20% of these assignments an A- on the final (3.6) worth 80% of the grade. The started out with some D's on the practice, maybe an F for missing an assignment, but then learned what the teacher wanted and learned the skill better and so on the final assessment were able to do better than if they didn't do the practice work. Average for this child is (3.6*0.8)+(2.9*0.2)=3.46 or an A-.

Now take the scenario where these other assignments don't count. Any student such as Child B that does not want to put in the work to be sure they get an A or will not assess their own work correctly and will either not do the work or not do it well and with less feedback will not be as prepared for the final assessment. They will be told that this other work doesn't matter that much and won't get feedback and that will decrease their interest in doing the work. Then instead of that A- they might have gotten with all the other assignments completed beforehand, they will likely get a B on the final assessment since its the first time they are actually being graded on these skills.

But there is nothing preventing the child from doing practice just because it isn't graded. Isn't that a good skill to learn? Practice for the sake of getting better at something vs. doing a worksheet for points (motivating them to copy/cheat/rush/turn in junk just to check the box?) Their grade is a far more accurate reflection of what they are capable of doing when you only grade assessments.

I do think there is an immaturity piece that lower classman will struggle to grasp the importance of doing the practice, but if you're going to grade it it should be no more than 5 or 10% of the grade. 20% is insanity, especially when you get 50% for writing your name on the paper. Then a kid who gets 50% on all assessments but 100% for their "effort" in doing the classwork will pass the class despite not being able to demonstrate any knowledge.

Also an F is not 50% as meaning they get credit for something. I wish people would recognize this. On a point scale it is 0-0.7. It makes no sense to give someone a -4.0 just because they didn't do an assignment. The 50 is just correcting a math issue with grades that only go from A-F. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/grading-and-reporting/secondary/grading-scale

https://www.fcps.edu/academics/grading-and-reporting/secondary/grading-scale

Depends on the school. In my 4.0 gradebook if I type “missing” it auto defaults to 2/4 as per school policy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first page says it takes way more time for a teacher to implement and that it’s hard to raise an overall grade during the year. There you’ve got your answer that it’s a bad way of grading.

I'm not sure if you are aware of how averages work when you add more numbers to the set that is being averaged??? The fewer numbers (graded work) in the set (ie. earlier in the school year when there have only been 5 graded assignment), the more impact a new number has when added to the set. As the year progresses, you now have 35 numbers in the set that gets averaged.... so each number has less impact on the average, and it is harder to change the average as new numbers (i.e. graded work) are added.

That's not a flaw of skills-based grading. That's just a mathematical fact of averages over the course of a year. As you add more grades, it takes a lot more deviation from the mean to actually pull the mean in one direction or the other. It may be harder to INCREASE your overall grade in April, but it's also harder to DECREASE your overall grade in April -- because all of your grades up to that point have lead to the grade that you have (i.e. the average of all your work so far).

If you liked having quarter grades where each quarter was a fresh start -- you are essentially saying that you liked being mislead to believe that you were doing better at the beginning of each quarter, without knowing how that would impact your final grade. You essentially prefer to be ignorant of where you truly stand, and you liked the mirage. The rolling grade book gives you the most up-to-date information on what your kid's grade is at any point in the year. Some people like those fun-house-mirrors what make you look skinnier than you are --- that's kind of what quarter grading is vs. the reality of rolling grade book. Which-- by the way -- is NOT the same as skills based grading. Those are two different issues.

If you are going to argue against something -- try to make an argument that is legitimate.

I don't see it that way. The rolling gradebook is another issue we aren't discussing so it doesn't contribute to this discussion. This discussion is on the elimination of smaller assignments and only focusing on several heavily weighted grades. The practice assignments used to be about 20% of the grade and they worked to help the child do better on the final assessment. So they were both a grade* 20% of the final grade averaged or a grade contributing to homework and a means to achieve a higher score on the final assessments. In this way perhaps they contributed to the 20% of the grade and also let's say 50% of the final assessment grade because if you do this work and do it well, you likely will do well on the final assessment.

In the previous grading example, Child A gets a B (3.0) on the 20% of these assignments an A- on the final (3.6) worth 80% of the grade. The started out with some D's on the practice, maybe an F for missing an assignment, but then learned what the teacher wanted and learned the skill better and so on the final assessment were able to do better than if they didn't do the practice work. Average for this child is (3.6*0.8)+(2.9*0.2)=3.46 or an A-.

Now take the scenario where these other assignments don't count. Any student such as Child B that does not want to put in the work to be sure they get an A or will not assess their own work correctly and will either not do the work or not do it well and with less feedback will not be as prepared for the final assessment. They will be told that this other work doesn't matter that much and won't get feedback and that will decrease their interest in doing the work. Then instead of that A- they might have gotten with all the other assignments completed beforehand, they will likely get a B on the final assessment since its the first time they are actually being graded on these skills.

But there is nothing preventing the child from doing practice just because it isn't graded. Isn't that a good skill to learn? Practice for the sake of getting better at something vs. doing a worksheet for points (motivating them to copy/cheat/rush/turn in junk just to check the box?) Their grade is a far more accurate reflection of what they are capable of doing when you only grade assessments.

I do think there is an immaturity piece that lower classman will struggle to grasp the importance of doing the practice, but if you're going to grade it it should be no more than 5 or 10% of the grade. 20% is insanity, especially when you get 50% for writing your name on the paper. Then a kid who gets 50% on all assessments but 100% for their "effort" in doing the classwork will pass the class despite not being able to demonstrate any knowledge.

Also an F is not 50% as meaning they get credit for something. I wish people would recognize this. On a point scale it is 0-0.7. It makes no sense to give someone a -4.0 just because they didn't do an assignment. The 50 is just correcting a math issue with grades that only go from A-F. https://www.fcps.edu/academics/grading-and-reporting/secondary/grading-scale

https://www.fcps.edu/academics/grading-and-reporting/secondary/grading-scale

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first page says it takes way more time for a teacher to implement and that it’s hard to raise an overall grade during the year. There you’ve got your answer that it’s a bad way of grading.

I'm not sure if you are aware of how averages work when you add more numbers to the set that is being averaged??? The fewer numbers (graded work) in the set (ie. earlier in the school year when there have only been 5 graded assignment), the more impact a new number has when added to the set. As the year progresses, you now have 35 numbers in the set that gets averaged.... so each number has less impact on the average, and it is harder to change the average as new numbers (i.e. graded work) are added.

That's not a flaw of skills-based grading. That's just a mathematical fact of averages over the course of a year. As you add more grades, it takes a lot more deviation from the mean to actually pull the mean in one direction or the other. It may be harder to INCREASE your overall grade in April, but it's also harder to DECREASE your overall grade in April -- because all of your grades up to that point have lead to the grade that you have (i.e. the average of all your work so far).

If you liked having quarter grades where each quarter was a fresh start -- you are essentially saying that you liked being mislead to believe that you were doing better at the beginning of each quarter, without knowing how that would impact your final grade. You essentially prefer to be ignorant of where you truly stand, and you liked the mirage. The rolling grade book gives you the most up-to-date information on what your kid's grade is at any point in the year. Some people like those fun-house-mirrors what make you look skinnier than you are --- that's kind of what quarter grading is vs. the reality of rolling grade book. Which-- by the way -- is NOT the same as skills based grading. Those are two different issues.

If you are going to argue against something -- try to make an argument that is legitimate.

I don't see it that way. The rolling gradebook is another issue we aren't discussing so it doesn't contribute to this discussion. This discussion is on the elimination of smaller assignments and only focusing on several heavily weighted grades. The practice assignments used to be about 20% of the grade and they worked to help the child do better on the final assessment. So they were both a grade* 20% of the final grade averaged or a grade contributing to homework and a means to achieve a higher score on the final assessments. In this way perhaps they contributed to the 20% of the grade and also let's say 50% of the final assessment grade because if you do this work and do it well, you likely will do well on the final assessment.

In the previous grading example, Child A gets a B (3.0) on the 20% of these assignments an A- on the final (3.6) worth 80% of the grade. The started out with some D's on the practice, maybe an F for missing an assignment, but then learned what the teacher wanted and learned the skill better and so on the final assessment were able to do better than if they didn't do the practice work. Average for this child is (3.6*0.8)+(2.9*0.2)=3.46 or an A-.

Now take the scenario where these other assignments don't count. Any student such as Child B that does not want to put in the work to be sure they get an A or will not assess their own work correctly and will either not do the work or not do it well and with less feedback will not be as prepared for the final assessment. They will be told that this other work doesn't matter that much and won't get feedback and that will decrease their interest in doing the work. Then instead of that A- they might have gotten with all the other assignments completed beforehand, they will likely get a B on the final assessment since its the first time they are actually being graded on these skills.

But there is nothing preventing the child from doing practice just because it isn't graded. Isn't that a good skill to learn? Practice for the sake of getting better at something vs. doing a worksheet for points (motivating them to copy/cheat/rush/turn in junk just to check the box?) Their grade is a far more accurate reflection of what they are capable of doing when you only grade assessments.

I do think there is an immaturity piece that lower classman will struggle to grasp the importance of doing the practice, but if you're going to grade it it should be no more than 5 or 10% of the grade. 20% is insanity, especially when you get 50% for writing your name on the paper. Then a kid who gets 50% on all assessments but 100% for their "effort" in doing the classwork will pass the class despite not being able to demonstrate any knowledge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first page says it takes way more time for a teacher to implement and that it’s hard to raise an overall grade during the year. There you’ve got your answer that it’s a bad way of grading.

I'm not sure if you are aware of how averages work when you add more numbers to the set that is being averaged??? The fewer numbers (graded work) in the set (ie. earlier in the school year when there have only been 5 graded assignment), the more impact a new number has when added to the set. As the year progresses, you now have 35 numbers in the set that gets averaged.... so each number has less impact on the average, and it is harder to change the average as new numbers (i.e. graded work) are added.

That's not a flaw of skills-based grading. That's just a mathematical fact of averages over the course of a year. As you add more grades, it takes a lot more deviation from the mean to actually pull the mean in one direction or the other. It may be harder to INCREASE your overall grade in April, but it's also harder to DECREASE your overall grade in April -- because all of your grades up to that point have lead to the grade that you have (i.e. the average of all your work so far).

If you liked having quarter grades where each quarter was a fresh start -- you are essentially saying that you liked being mislead to believe that you were doing better at the beginning of each quarter, without knowing how that would impact your final grade. You essentially prefer to be ignorant of where you truly stand, and you liked the mirage. The rolling grade book gives you the most up-to-date information on what your kid's grade is at any point in the year. Some people like those fun-house-mirrors what make you look skinnier than you are --- that's kind of what quarter grading is vs. the reality of rolling grade book. Which-- by the way -- is NOT the same as skills based grading. Those are two different issues.

If you are going to argue against something -- try to make an argument that is legitimate.

I don't see it that way. The rolling gradebook is another issue we aren't discussing so it doesn't contribute to this discussion. This discussion is on the elimination of smaller assignments and only focusing on several heavily weighted grades. The practice assignments used to be about 20% of the grade and they worked to help the child do better on the final assessment. So they were both a grade* 20% of the final grade averaged or a grade contributing to homework and a means to achieve a higher score on the final assessments. In this way perhaps they contributed to the 20% of the grade and also let's say 50% of the final assessment grade because if you do this work and do it well, you likely will do well on the final assessment.

In the previous grading example, Child A gets a B (3.0) on the 20% of these assignments an A- on the final (3.6) worth 80% of the grade. The started out with some D's on the practice, maybe an F for missing an assignment, but then learned what the teacher wanted and learned the skill better and so on the final assessment were able to do better than if they didn't do the practice work. Average for this child is (3.6*0.8)+(2.9*0.2)=3.46 or an A-.

Now take the scenario where these other assignments don't count. Any student such as Child B that does not want to put in the work to be sure they get an A or will not assess their own work correctly and will either not do the work or not do it well and with less feedback will not be as prepared for the final assessment. They will be told that this other work doesn't matter that much and won't get feedback and that will decrease their interest in doing the work. Then instead of that A- they might have gotten with all the other assignments completed beforehand, they will likely get a B on the final assessment since its the first time they are actually being graded on these skills.

But there is nothing preventing the child from doing practice just because it isn't graded. Isn't that a good skill to learn? Practice for the sake of getting better at something vs. doing a worksheet for points (motivating them to copy/cheat/rush/turn in junk just to check the box?) Their grade is a far more accurate reflection of what they are capable of doing when you only grade assessments.

I do think there is an immaturity piece that lower classman will struggle to grasp the importance of doing the practice, but if you're going to grade it it should be no more than 5 or 10% of the grade. 20% is insanity, especially when you get 50% for writing your name on the paper. Then a kid who gets 50% on all assessments but 100% for their "effort" in doing the classwork will pass the class despite not being able to demonstrate any knowledge.