It should be noted that SBG may also solve the issue of global warming.

Instead of conventional thermometers that shows degrees from 70 to 110 in increments of 1, let's use new thermometers that have only four levels: 100, 90, 80, and 70 degrees.
Anything in between is rounded, but we'll change the rules a bit: 99.5 or more is rounded to 100, 99.5 to 89.5 is rounded to 90, 89.5 to 79.5 is rounded to 80, and anything else is rounded to 70.
In this way, those hot summer stretches are gone: maybe we'll get 100, but rarely.
And we'll have moderate weather, all year round. Problem solved.
Oh, and if a measurement doesn't turn out the way we want it, we'll just take it again until we measure what we'd like to see.

Anonymous wrote:Hasn't it all been said at this point?

I think anyone reading/following this thread can make up their mind about the two sides of the issue.

Shall we let it go?

No. We are still waiting to hear how her junior or senior boy has been compelled to do more in class, learned better study skills and mastered material better with the new SBG grading system. PP. We are so excited to finally hear your positives of the system for your child. Please do explain. We've asked now at least four times and hope you will finally reveal your child's wonderful experience with SBG.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

“Baiting”? You mean actually discussing the grading policy vs. slinging insults?

There are multiple posters. It’s really odd that you think there is only one person.

You are also responding to multiple people. You are not actually discussing the grading policy.

I was discussing the policy before PPs started name calling and coming up with conspiracy theories.

Sure Jan

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

“Baiting”? You mean actually discussing the grading policy vs. slinging insults?

There are multiple posters. It’s really odd that you think there is only one person.

You are also responding to multiple people. You are not actually discussing the grading policy.

I was discussing the policy before PPs started name calling and coming up with conspiracy theories.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

“Baiting”? You mean actually discussing the grading policy vs. slinging insults?

There are multiple posters. It’s really odd that you think there is only one person.

Hi again, principal Calvert.

Hasn't it all been said at this point?

I think anyone reading/following this thread can make up their mind about the two sides of the issue.

Shall we let it go?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

The plot thickens!

So fun!

You seem to be the only one having fun at quipping back and forth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

“Baiting”? You mean actually discussing the grading policy vs. slinging insults?

There are multiple posters. It’s really odd that you think there is only one person.

You are also responding to multiple people. You are not actually discussing the grading policy.

Yes most other schools in FCPS have finals.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

“Baiting”? You mean actually discussing the grading policy vs. slinging insults?

There are multiple posters. It’s really odd that you think there is only one person.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

The plot thickens!

So fun!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"some parents just want grade inflation and will freak out"

To me this is the equivalent of name calling. How is it any different than calling someone stupid? It's debasing what this entire thread is about.

I don't control what others say and those posts weren't directed towards me. Others called them out already. I thought the language was unnecessary, but felt they were responding to some sort of previous debasing language such as the above.

There were only two posts in close to 400 posts here that you found anything remotely rude and we already had that discussion. There wasn't much there. There are a lot of posts from you mainly reducing arguments to nefarious accusations while making few positive arguments of your own.

We are all ears. How has your junior or senior boy been compelled to do more, learned better study skills and mastered material better with the new system?

Huh? There were many earlier name calling/disrespectful posts.

PP was discussing the behavior, which seems pretty accurate IMO. A recent post described "buffering" as grade inflation (something like taking a B+ to an A).

You call it grade inflation. Others like me amd even the SBG just call it grading multiple assignments as part of a grade. Or grading to a more accurate number with pluses and minuses. Grade inflation would mean that the grade is not linked to actual work and just made up which is pretty much what changing a past grade is. To me SBG is a weird form of grade inflation without any new work completed.

Here was the quote:
"Kids who deserve As do not always get those deserved As at JMHS. Kids who deserve As at other FCPS locations, get As. And, kids at most FCPS locations all get to add buffers to grades, boosting up scores from B+ to an A, but not at JMHS."

NP: and the troll took those quotes and addresses only the second one saying something - so you’re upset you student’s grade is only reflective of knowledge? Clearly ignoring that JMHS students get lower grades.

More name calling.

The kids who “deserve” to get As, are the ones who actually get the As, not the ones who rely on buffers.

I don’t believe the person (yes, I think it’s one person) who is baiting everyone else is affiliated with JMHS. If she is, it’s the principal.

Anonymous wrote:Even though this has been stated MANY times -- I'll state it again for those who are hard-of-comprehending.... there is more than one person on this thread who doesn't have a problem with SBG. Some of the PPs keep assuming there is only one person they are talking to. Not the case.

Open.your.mind.

+1

There is more than one poster

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]One bad apple purposefully thread crapped and ruined a worthy discussion. Best example was when SHE bolded both of these sentences from a valid response:

[b]Kids who deserve As do not always get those deserved As at JMHS. [/b]

[b] And, kids at most FCPS locations all get to add buffers to grades, boosting up scores from B+ to an A, but not at JMHS. [/b]

She then completely ignores the first point that SHE bolded and says: “So you want buffers for your kid because they can't perform at the A level?”

[/quote]

Is this a real discussion or are you just venting? Because in a real discussion people might have a different opinion than you and they might question what you’ve said.

How is the first point relevant to the second?

And it’s a legit question. Why do you want “buffers” at Madison?
[/quote]

For me "buffers" if I'm understanding them are important because everything my kid learns and is graded on should not just be about test day. I want to get a better picture of all the days in school and I know that some days test day isn't a child's best educational performance day or isn't always the best way to show their capability in a subject. I like multiple grades to show mastery and solidification of abilities as well as an ability to review work and edit. I was fine with summatives being the majority of grades with buffers. This is actually an SBG objective to have multiple data points but for some reason these proponents don't seem to be able to make the connection that this is best obtained through multiple graded assignments on the same concept and that high school classes move from concept to concept throughout the year and it's very difficult to release the same concepts throughout the year. They've falsely convinced themselves that a new test on the next unit of study will replace practice work and quizzes. On grades, the new grading is extremely complicated to follow but in addition it is not very forgiving. The lack of pluses and minuses. The summative grade only. Unforgiving and it's weird to teach children that an old grade can just be forged to be higher if you do something better in the future as if you can just rewrite your past. It's a weird lesson to teach kids that original grades dont matter and no corrections are needed for a grade bump. [b]Its also weird that Madison doesnt have finals.[/b] Wouldn't that be a first choice in making sure kids learned all the material? It is also strange how SBG comes across as progressive in the marketing but also is very much related to the teach to the test no child left behind objectives, that so many opposed as lacking progressiveness and being too rigid. Many people wanted more buffers and less rigidity to the formulaic way sols were dictating learning. In everything moderation is key. As it is now, there are no buffers and it's a weird ever changing grading system for kids to understand, learn, and succeed in. I believe all students including low performing students would do better with a more straightforward grading system with multiple data points like SBG says but implemented with actual different data points for mastery. [/quote]
Do the other FCPS high schools have finals?