OP here. I agree with a lot of what has been said. I don't know if 'P' means my child knows fractions cold or has demonstrated the concept but not always consistently applied it. My child has ADD so it's a good news/bad news that work completion is a separate grade and not part of the main grade. On one hand, if my child gets the concept but isn't turning in work, he isn't penalized in the academic grade, on the other hand if he isn't turning in work it isn't impacting the academic grade so it isn't a priority for the school to loop us in and work with DS. There is also no natural consequence for him to experience. At some point follow-thru and completion will matter and I question if DS will be ready.

I wonder if proficient means my child got 100% on the assessment or 70% or somewhere in between. I need to understand where the weaknesses are, like a UCARE breakdown or having some comments to understand the weaker proficiency grades . I also need to understand what are careless mistakes versus weak understanding of the topic so I can either look into strategies to prevent careless mistakes or additional resources to help look at a topic a different way or more practice in areas of struggle.

As for In progress, not clear if this means a new concept is being taught so its fine to be In-progress or " Whoa Nelly, your kid is lagging here" It's like a combination of the old satisfactory ( if your kid is progressing at an expected rate) and needs improvement (if your kid doesn't turn this into a P by the end of the year). I've asked about DS getting I's in writing thru 3rd quarter and teacher was not concerned and EMT team agreed no need for any additional resources that child was on-grade level. So not only is it unclear the mastery in quantative terms for proficient and the strength/weaknesses within that and the fact you can be proficient apart from work completion BUT I can't tell when my child is not moving towards profiency fast enough and may need some extra help before outright failing and getting N.

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.

This is our impression as well. Proficient seems to mean mediocre, and there is nothing for motivated students to strive for.

As a parent under the old system, it seemed like grade inflation was wild there. O,s seemed to be the norm...they seemed pretty meaningless too.

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't mind getting rid of the letter grade. Instead, they could send home the actual tests and grades (% grade). That will tell me more about what my child know and does not know.

The previous poster seems to think P measures mastery. I think P is more like a combination of ABC together.

Maybe this varies by school. At DD's school. P is more like A/B+. Anything less is I or N

I wouldn't mind getting rid of the letter grade. Instead, they could send home the actual tests and grades (% grade). That will tell me more about what my child know and does not know.

The previous poster seems to think P measures mastery. I think P is more like a combination of ABC together.

Anonymous wrote:
It sounds like you have quite a bias here. You seem to think that the reason a parent would want their child to get good grades is to "preen." I disagree. Parents want (and deserve) to be able to see data that demonstrates what information the student has learned. This information used to be readily accessible in MCPS schools. Under the new reporting structure and report cards, it isn't accessible at all. Sure, a teacher can claim that all students have earned a 'P" but what, really does this mean. Does it mean that the student learned 70% of the material, 80%, 90%? Sure, one could argue that somewhere between 70-90% is proficient, but as a parent, I want to know whether it is the former or the latter. The is quite a difference between 70% and 90% and when the schools want to put the vast majority of kids into the "P" category, it means that kids who are actually earning on the lower end will look like stronger students and, perhaps, will not get the extra help they need.
Time to stop vilifying the motives of parents and time to examine why a large school system would want to artificially make it appear that most of the kids are performing at exactly the same level.

ason.

First, ONE of the reasons a parent would want their child to get good grades is to preen. Not the only reason. But definitely one of them.

Second, the O/S/I and letter grade reporting structure did not demonstrate what information the student learned any more than the current grading structure does. An A in social studies (for example) tells you that the teacher thinks the child did well. But what did the child learn? And did the A demonstrate that the child learned 90%+ of the material? And was this child who got an A performing at the same level as that child who got an A? And what if most of the class got an A?

Third, a P does not mean, and is not supposed to mean, that this child who got a P is performing at exactly the same level as that child who got a P. What the P means is that the child learned what the child was supposed to learn (I am assuming 100% of it, but I don't know that for a fact). It doesn't mean that the child learned what it was supposed to learn and only that, nothing more.

Fourth, I actually agree that the grading system is not perfect. If it were me, I would get rid of report cards in elementary school altogether, and only have written teacher comments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. First, why on earth would anyone want to foil the idea that you should do your best to get a good grade? I understand that from the county's perspective it only matters that a high enough % of students achieve proficiency. This is their goal and not in the interest of the individual student. An individual student should learn how to do their best and that putting forth effort is the way to succeed. This is one of the most important messages that you can develop in students. Achievement doesn't just come from genetic luck, its merit driven.

The new grading system doesn't do anything differently in terms of comparative data. The new grading system provides less information on the individual student's performance which is where the problem exists. Neither system provided comparative data. Frankly, comparative data is actually a good measurement. Its often used to identify learning disabilities.

I was the PP, and I did not mean to say that you shouldn't do your best. I meant to say that you shouldn't do your best so that you get a good grade. Rather, you should do your best because you want to learn and because doing something in a shoddy manner is a waste of everybody's time (including yours).

And I agree that the new grading system doesn't actually do anything differently in terms of comparative data (which, yes, is useful), but it certainly does something differently in terms of perception. For all anybody knows, most of the class used to get As or Os, just as (people say that) most of the class now gets Ps. But parents whose children got As or Os could still preen themselves on the superiority of their children. Whereas it is much more difficult for parents to preen themselves on the superiority of their children when their children get Ps.

It sounds like you have quite a bias here. You seem to think that the reason a parent would want their child to get good grades is to "preen." I disagree. Parents want (and deserve) to be able to see data that demonstrates what information the student has learned. This information used to be readily accessible in MCPS schools. Under the new reporting structure and report cards, it isn't accessible at all. Sure, a teacher can claim that all students have earned a 'P" but what, really does this mean. Does it mean that the student learned 70% of the material, 80%, 90%? Sure, one could argue that somewhere between 70-90% is proficient, but as a parent, I want to know whether it is the former or the latter. The is quite a difference between 70% and 90% and when the schools want to put the vast majority of kids into the "P" category, it means that kids who are actually earning on the lower end will look like stronger students and, perhaps, will not get the extra help they need.
Time to stop vilifying the motives of parents and time to examine why a large school system would want to artificially make it appear that most of the kids are performing at exactly the same level.

I agree with this. This is grade suppression at a massive scale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think nobody is advocating getting good grades for good grades' sake. However, there has to be something that tells you and the kids that they learned what they are supposed to learn. I personally want my kids to care about grades. Grades can be a great tool to motivate kids to work hard.

I'm the PP again. I'm amused by the part in bold. I have received good grades for work where I knew that I did not do my best. I have also received bad grades for work where I knew that I did do my best.

And as for a grade that tells you and the kids that they have learned what they are supposed to learn, the new grading system actually has exactly such a grade: P.

Where do I begin? First of all, whether you did your best or not is actually not necessarily related to the quality of the work. Second, a good grading system will be better at teasing out differences in performance.

I personally think the P doesn't tell much other than my kid is probably not going to drag the school's test score down. Meaning that he is with the 80% that is above the failing group. Nothing else. Is that all I am supposed to know?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. First, why on earth would anyone want to foil the idea that you should do your best to get a good grade? I understand that from the county's perspective it only matters that a high enough % of students achieve proficiency. This is their goal and not in the interest of the individual student. An individual student should learn how to do their best and that putting forth effort is the way to succeed. This is one of the most important messages that you can develop in students. Achievement doesn't just come from genetic luck, its merit driven.

The new grading system doesn't do anything differently in terms of comparative data. The new grading system provides less information on the individual student's performance which is where the problem exists. Neither system provided comparative data. Frankly, comparative data is actually a good measurement. Its often used to identify learning disabilities.

I was the PP, and I did not mean to say that you shouldn't do your best. I meant to say that you shouldn't do your best so that you get a good grade. Rather, you should do your best because you want to learn and because doing something in a shoddy manner is a waste of everybody's time (including yours).

And I agree that the new grading system doesn't actually do anything differently in terms of comparative data (which, yes, is useful), but it certainly does something differently in terms of perception. For all anybody knows, most of the class used to get As or Os, just as (people say that) most of the class now gets Ps. But parents whose children got As or Os could still preen themselves on the superiority of their children. Whereas it is much more difficult for parents to preen themselves on the superiority of their children when their children get Ps.

It sounds like you have quite a bias here. You seem to think that the reason a parent would want their child to get good grades is to "preen." I disagree. Parents want (and deserve) to be able to see data that demonstrates what information the student has learned. This information used to be readily accessible in MCPS schools. Under the new reporting structure and report cards, it isn't accessible at all. Sure, a teacher can claim that all students have earned a 'P" but what, really does this mean. Does it mean that the student learned 70% of the material, 80%, 90%? Sure, one could argue that somewhere between 70-90% is proficient, but as a parent, I want to know whether it is the former or the latter. The is quite a difference between 70% and 90% and when the schools want to put the vast majority of kids into the "P" category, it means that kids who are actually earning on the lower end will look like stronger students and, perhaps, will not get the extra help they need.
Time to stop vilifying the motives of parents and time to examine why a large school system would want to artificially make it appear that most of the kids are performing at exactly the same level.

no comments, one conference in the fall. At my conference the teacher could not explain the grading system.

Do the teachers get to write any comments on the report card? Do teachers ever meet with parents? Just curious if the P on the report card is the only feedback that people are getting. That would be weird.

Anonymous wrote:I think nobody is advocating getting good grades for good grades' sake. However, there has to be something that tells you and the kids that they learned what they are supposed to learn. I personally want my kids to care about grades. Grades can be a great tool to motivate kids to work hard.

I'm the PP again. I'm amused by the part in bold. I have received good grades for work where I knew that I did not do my best. I have also received bad grades for work where I knew that I did do my best.

And as for a grade that tells you and the kids that they have learned what they are supposed to learn, the new grading system actually has exactly such a grade: P.

I think nobody is advocating getting good grades for good grades' sake. However, there has to be something that tells you and the kids that they learned what they are supposed to learn. I personally want my kids to care about grades. Grades can be a great tool to motivate kids to work hard.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. First, why on earth would anyone want to foil the idea that you should do your best to get a good grade? I understand that from the county's perspective it only matters that a high enough % of students achieve proficiency. This is their goal and not in the interest of the individual student. An individual student should learn how to do their best and that putting forth effort is the way to succeed. This is one of the most important messages that you can develop in students. Achievement doesn't just come from genetic luck, its merit driven.

The new grading system doesn't do anything differently in terms of comparative data. The new grading system provides less information on the individual student's performance which is where the problem exists. Neither system provided comparative data. Frankly, comparative data is actually a good measurement. Its often used to identify learning disabilities.

I was the PP, and I did not mean to say that you shouldn't do your best. I meant to say that you shouldn't do your best so that you get a good grade. Rather, you should do your best because you want to learn and because doing something in a shoddy manner is a waste of everybody's time (including yours).

And I agree that the new grading system doesn't actually do anything differently in terms of comparative data (which, yes, is useful), but it certainly does something differently in terms of perception. For all anybody knows, most of the class used to get As or Os, just as (people say that) most of the class now gets Ps. But parents whose children got As or Os could still preen themselves on the superiority of their children. Whereas it is much more difficult for parents to preen themselves on the superiority of their children when their children get Ps.

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.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. First, why on earth would anyone want to foil the idea that you should do your best to get a good grade? I understand that from the county's perspective it only matters that a high enough % of students achieve proficiency. This is their goal and not in the interest of the individual student. An individual student should learn how to do their best and that putting forth effort is the way to succeed. This is one of the most important messages that you can develop in students. Achievement doesn't just come from genetic luck, its merit driven.

The new grading system doesn't do anything differently in terms of comparative data. The new grading system provides less information on the individual student's performance which is where the problem exists. Neither system provided comparative data. Frankly, comparative data is actually a good measurement. Its often used to identify learning disabilities.