Wake schools: No more zero grades

Published October 31, 2013

by T. Keung Hui, The News and Observer, October 29, 2013.

Starting as soon as next school year, zeros may be banned as grades from Wake County schools, and students could be guaranteed the right to hand in late work for credit and retake exams to get higher scores.

School administrators said Tuesday that the district should overhaul its grading policy to make sure the marks reflect what students know, not how well they behave. Senior officials told school board members that the current system in which students can get grades as low as zero is too punitive.

“The zero knocks kids out of the box,” Superintendent Jim Merrill said. “That is the dropout path.”

Todd Wirt, assistant superintendent for academics, said Merrill’s top administrators are considering setting 50 as the lowest grade a student could receive throughout the state’s largest school system.

Cathy Moore, deputy superintendent for school performance, said administrators are hoping for the board’s support to use a revised grading policy and an accompanying set of school guidelines for the 2014-15 school year.

The proposals drew mixed reactions at Tuesday’s policy committee meeting, with some members questioning why students who don’t do any work should receive any grade higher than zero.

“Not giving a zero protects a slacker,” school board member Jim Martin said.

For the past decade, Wake school administrators have been examining the way grades are issued. The district has brought in consultants and had principals, assistant principals and teachers read books that charge that the traditional method of issuing grades is flawed.

Much of the review focused on how getting a zero can make it almost mathematically impossible for a student to get a passing grade.

“A power of a zero in a 100-point scale is a killer,” said school board member Tom Benton, a retired principal. “Our kids can’t recover from that.”

Administrators had proposed changing the grading policy between 2010 and 2012 before the issue fell off the table during the district’s search for a new superintendent, which resulted in Merrill’s hiring in June. The idea emerged again Tuesday.

Under the revised policy, middle school and high school students would join elementary school students in having separate behavior grades. The traditional grades wouldn’t reflect “academic-related behaviors.” And the behavior grades would not affect a student’s grade-point average.

The guidelines that come with the revised policy would say that students who hand in work late would be guaranteed credit. Administrators haven’t decided yet whether to cap the penalty as low as 10 percent or as high as 30 percent.

The guidelines also say that a student can ask for a retest regardless of the original grade. The higher of the two grades would be recorded.

In the absence of districtwide guidelines, some schools have adopted their own changes, such as not allowing zeros. School administrators said having a districtwide policy would promote consistency among the 170 schools.

“The innovative principals in the district have already done it,” said John Williams, senior director of high school programs. “The results show it is working. The ones who don’t want to be that bold are waiting for that policy.”

Martin disputed the idea that getting rid of zeros would be considered bold. He said he’s not comfortable giving a 50 to a student who doesn’t do any work.

Martin said he agrees that keeping student conduct out of grades in elementary school makes sense. But he said that older students, especially those in high school, should be treated differently.

Martin, an N.C. State chemistry professor, related how as a teacher he sets expectations for students to do their work on time because that’s what they’ll need to do when they enter the workforce.

“Turning in your work is frankly a behavior of your job that you need to do,” he said.

The grading changes will next be discussed at a joint meeting of the board’s policy and student achievement committees Nov. 14.

 

November 1, 2013 at 12:19 am
Vicky Hutter says:

Unbelievable the policy changes the Wake County School Board will be considering in November---talk about going backwards in terms of keeping American students academically competitive and competent to enable them to have successful lives and being able to be contributing members of society after they graduate from high school. Social promotion had a devastating effect on our schools in the past and what do the "new" policies achieve if they reward nonperformance or by not allowing the student to fail, regardless of effort on the student's part.

Voters in Wake County should replace any school board member who supports this further dumbing-down of the public schools and which make a mockery of the academic achievements of students who do the work and are learning since the diploma from a high school with these new policies will be meaningless.

Genuine self-esteem and self-respect comes from the individual striving and valuing his efforts to master difficult tasks and materials---certainly a policy of not allowing anyone to fail will not lead to increased self-esteem for the student but will give the false impression that competence and mastery are not important to be successful in life.

All of the pressure to decrease drop-out rates or suspension rates by not holding students accountable for learning is going in the wrong direction and is setting the schools and students up for failure. A much saner and efficacious approach would be to get parents genuinely involved in their child's school and valuing education. Higher expectations rather than lowering expectations will improve the public schools. Genuine self-esteem and and the student developing a sense of achievement will cut down on drop-outs but they will not be achieved by these proposed policies.

Administrators including the present school superintendent who endorse these new policies should be fired or removed from positions of authority in the public schools. The school board must resist the pressure to allow these idiotic and wrong-headed policies to be adopted in the Wake County schools before the schools and students are damaged further.

November 14, 2013 at 11:30 am
Bill Gibson, II says:

I'm not sure... what leads a student to get a zero on an assignment or test? Is it extreme ignorance, or realizing that there are no consequences for your actions, or inactions?

I know you can't do the following, but I attribute this life's lesson to Col. Joseph Dunn, who was a dreaded instructor many years ago. There were 13 of us that enrolled for a "Real Estate" course at one of the UNC System higher-ed institutions, that was being taught by Joe Dunn. He had a hair cut in the style of a Roman Emperor, and it was shiny white. When he talked about the moon over Three Rivers Stadium, he said, "It was bootiful, simply bootiful."

I wasn't really "into" this course. I just needed the hours, and a passing grade. I didn't pay much attention to the reading, nor to what Col. Dunn was saying in class. Then, the first test came... and then it was graded and handed back. There were three grades on my test. I don't actually recall either the letter grade, nor the matching number grade. I don't even think I flunked the test, but here was the kicker. There was a fractional grade. I had a 12/13. When I asked what this meant, Col. Dunn said the denominator was the number of students in the course, and the numerator was my ranking on the test in comparison to the rest of the students. What a slap in the face. I could live with a C-, or even an 84, but 12/13... that moved me from my comfort zone into "not fitting with my self-image." Well, the person who got 13/13 dropped the course, and for the next two tests (one being the final), I got a 2/12 grade. Joe Dunn found the way that motivated me to work, and I thank him for it. It was awful uncomfortable during the process, but the result was well worth it.