Lazy Students? Proficiency Based Grading and the Common Core Will Only Make it Worse.

This one isn't going to make me any friends.

Most of you know I'm a teacher, and one of the current whims in my profession is the idea of proficiency based grading (PBG). This revolutionary idea, is based on the idea that every subject has certain "cores" or "standards" that are essential for each student to know by the end of that semester. The teacher's job is to design a curriculum in which each student is tested by means of "formative" and "summative" methods to get each student to understand these essential core truths.  Think of formative testing as practice (homework, notes, worksheets, etc.) and summative as the application of that practice  (projects, tests, quizzes, presentations). The summative assessments, according to most pedagogy experts, should represent about 90% of their final grade.

This kid didn't listen when I lectured on the
societal grossness of wearing fedoras.  
So big deal, right? Education is always changing its educationalese, why should anyone care about the jargon that goes into my child's education?

Because we teachers (using PBG) are changing the value of work ethic. Many states, districts, and school boards who are jumping on the "common core" bandwagon, are claiming that this type of grading system more closely aligns with standardized testing. If kids show the aptitude to pass classes where the majority of their grade is based on summative assessments, then they will probably do well on standardized tests. Bravo. Your causation skills are correct. We have taught your student to do well on a multiple choice test. Now get ready for all the jobs that require test taking...

Oh wait, are there jobs that take tests regularly?  In my four jobs in the ten years prior to becoming a teacher, I didn't take ONE test. NOT ONE.

I did get my wood-saw certification and forklift license. Both required that I show the ability to properly operate dangerous machinery under careful observation. Maybe that was a form of testing.

However, in real life, I never penciled-in any bubbles on a Scantron sheet. Being smart almost never helped me in the real world. Saying, "Sorry I didn't do the work, it kind of felt belittling to someone of my intelligence," was never a valid excuse to any of my bosses.  Likewise, my suggestions for bettering the workplace were almost never listened to. Corporations don't want smarty-pantses, they want worker bees.

My major beef with PBG is that it places little to no value on formative assessment (in other words, the daily work). My own state of Oregon (via H.B. 2220)  claims that teachers cannot put any value on behavior as part of their final grade. They've determined that behavior includes homework (Oregon has since reversed course on this ruling, although many districts are being pressured to abandon homework as a grade criteria).

Behavior--is throwing a fit in class, or smiling nicely and sucking up. I have dealt with behaviorally challenged kids in the past. It is tempting to grade a student up or down based on their behavior, but in my seven years, I have never once docked a kid grade-wise for being a spoiled brat, being a know-it-all, having attitude, being a bigot, throwing a fit when I assign an essay, etc.  Do those behaviors affect their success?  Of course.  But if they DO THE WORK, I will grade that work unbiasedly.

However, calling homework behavior, is idiocy. Homework is a task. Doing homework (whether it is actually taken home, or done in the classroom, i.e. worksheets) is a skill. The ability to get your "job" done in a normal amount of time, is the responsibility of every student, just like doing your "tasks" at work are part of your job. Ever worked with a person who refused to do his/her fair share of work?  How long did they last?  Weeks; a month?

Exactly. Yet here we are in 2013, and the voices of change are claiming that we aren't meeting kids needs. That these poor kids are bored, stagnated by outdated curriculum and passé methodology. It's exactly this boring curriculum which encourages kids to spend 55 hours a week on television/video games/computer/texting.  What kids need is only essential information presented in a non-biased method (hopefully via technology) that is easily testable to see if the kids know the material. Great. Except what is the "essential" material? And what does non-biased mean?  Does that mean it's sponsored by The Gates Foundation?  Does that mean it's tests written by private corporations clamoring for a piece of that huge pie if education is privatized?

And if a kid can pass these tests, but doesn't do any of the work in class, they still get to move on? Are we just going to reward the genius kids who are incredibly lazy? I would've loved PBG. I always tested well. It was doing the assignments that stopped me from getting a 4.0 GPA. Showing my work on math assignments? Why does it matter if I can get the answer right...

Hey Sully, a nerd invented your duct tape. 
Because eventually I encountered problems I couldn't solve based on my own intelligence. And not being able to work with a formula left me unable to come up with any solutions. When I got to college I actually paid attention to the mathematical steps because I realized I wasn't the greatest thing since bleached bread. A strange thing happened, though...I actually became a good math student. Not just a kid who could test well by plugging in random numbers (especially if the test was multiple choice).

The other side of this argument is that kids who don't test well, those who don't have great analysis skills, etc. will not pass the class. Some of these kids are hard workers, always doing the work on time, always asking questions, always putting effort and creativity into the artistic assignments...these kids aren't going to make it in our new schools. (I'm not even going to bring in the argument of getting Special Education students, kids with learning disabilities, and English Language Learners to meet these expectations--which is NOT going to happen). Only the brightest will survive. I've always believed that there are two major types of good students: The hard working kid who is probably average on the Bell Curve, and the gifted kid who often forgets (or doesn't do) the homework.  It's the old talent vs. work ethic argument. For an example of this, watch Monster's University, which is a perfect analogy to the college sports recruiting scene.

Just Jerry Rice, running the same hill at age 49. 
Most sports fans understand that talent trumps work ethic. But that doesn't explain people like Jerry Rice who wasn't highly recruited, was small, slow, and had average hands. Yet after years of brutal practices, he trained himself into the greatest receiver (and maybe the GOAT) in NFL history.  Analogously speaking, Jerry Rice would've failed a PBG system.

America was built on the principle of hard work. Sure, we glorify innovation, creativity, and ingenuity, but if you don't work, you don't get paid. Yet here we are, in a stagnated economy and an educational crisis (or so they say), and we are teaching our kids that working isn't important. Performing well, is.

These educational gurus must've loved Allen Iverson. He usually played well when it counted. But he also thought that practice didn't make perfect...practice was well:
We're sitting here, and I'm supposed to be the franchise player, and we're talking about practice. I mean listen, we're sitting here talking about practice, not a game, not a game, not a game, but we're talking about practice...How in the hell can I make my teammates better by practicing?

Iverson was a good player, but I often wondered if he passed the ball one more time; or ran his set offense instead of lowering his head and driving the lane; or listened to Coach Brown, if the 76ers would have one more title hanging from their rafters.

But Iverson would've been wonderful at "summative assessments."

15 comments:

  1. I think Socrates would be an advocate for private education. And, because of that, would be required to take the poison all over again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Either public or private, sometimes we just have to stop and smell the flowers. Hopefully they aren't Hemlock.

      Delete
  2. Very satisfying rant on a Monday morning. I was told to throw caution to the wind and create a revolutionary set of lessons to teach those skills. Yowza!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The positives of PBG is that it is aimed towards teaching skills...I just hope we remember that turning in work on time is a skill (an important skill that employers want).

      Delete
  3. Here, here! It was bad when I was still in the profession, and these two+ school years out, I felt like it was getting worse, and you just validated my feelings. I'm scared for how it will be once I finally get back in. Luckily, I was able to grade on homework up till my last year of teaching. (My last year was a 5/6 combo, and we began the AVID program with them, which *does* focus on the work ethic part.) However, even *with* AVID coursing through their brains, they still liked to take the easy way out when it came to benchmark tests. Why solve the math problem, when you can figure out the pattern of the questions and find the answer without doing any work?! I tried to explain to the them the value and importance of hard work, but in the end, all they wanted to do was score Proficient on the tests, no matter how they got there. :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. Test only based grading. I would've rocked it, and later turned into the laziest human alive.

      Delete
  4. As a student out of the public system for a few years now nothing makes me more frustrated than thinking about school policy in america. Having had time to reflect I've come to feel like High school was the biggest sham in the entire world; I was challenged once mentally my whole time at SHS, thank you pre-cal with Mr. Schmidt. I did maybe 50% of the homework I was assigned, took almost every AP course offered, graduated with over 50 college credits and had a GPA just under 3.5. I was proud of this then, now it just makes me sad. I really can't imagine what it's like to go into teaching, a field which has no lucrative benefits, and be shit on constantly by your administration and government. I'm sorry. You were one of my favorite teachers at SHS (though I only took one class with you). I guess all i have to say is I know myself and many others share the same feeling about education in the US as you. After taking a few Sociology, and Psychology classes that explore this subject I was troubled to find out that we've been trying to get it right for a very long time. It makes me somber.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are very real problems in education, some of which can be changed (many of which are non-systemic). However, many of the problems stem from having kids that care about their future in the same classroom as kids who want no part of learning. It's like trying to coach a team where half the players wants to win, and the other half wants to lose.

      The fact that everyone at plays "armchair teachers" at home, only exasperates the problem. It's like the parents who teach their kids that cops are bad. What good does it do, but encourage their kids to fight authority and end up in jail.

      Delete
    2. *half the players want ... I hate not being able to edit comments.

      Delete
  5. This was thought-provoking, and I took a personal interest in it while reading. I suppose it would be impractical to have two systems of grading based on which of the two categories the students fall under - the meticulous hard worker vs. the lazy genius? Yes, that's rhetorical...

    I agree that basing the majority of the grade on summative methods is unfair, and education-wise, incomplete. But I personally would have had a much easier time in school without the pressure of piled-up undone assignments, which eventually led me to drop out before even completing the 8th grade.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, that's why I think it should be a combination of both tests and daily work that make up a grade. They have to learn the material, but they also have to do "some" of the work. I admit, I was a lazy student, but I did enough daily work to get a decent GPA. Gotta play the game, jump through the hoops that we all do. Most kids get shoved right into high school regardless of whether they EVER did any homework. Based on your writing ability, you obviously found some education somewhere.

      Delete
  6. Good read Chris. Just to play Devil's advocate: I think both have a place in our world. I agree that we should all be more like Jerry Rice. It's the effort we put into life that gives us results. There's value in the Allen Iversons too. Sure they don't always reach their full potential, but how many people really do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, Iverson (besides his epic quote) isn't the greatest example...as he worked his butt off on the floor. There are many great "talented" athletes who put in minimal work and are out the league in a few years. I just hate wasted talent.

      We all can't reach our full potential, as there would be way too many people at the tops of their field, but laziness is not a trait we need more of in the United States.

      Delete
  7. Shat! I wrote this thoughtful comment and then Blogger ATE IT. Just know that the gist of it was, I tested pretty damn well in school, and it hasn't helped me one iota in life.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh man, I wrote about this same issue not long ago on my own blog in a post entitled "the public school paradox". I absolutely LOATHE common core. In fact, I am loathe to any standardized testing. Thanks for breaking down some things I didn't understand fully, because as a parent, only "buzz words" are thrown in our faces as opposed to how things REALLY work. And it's extremely frustrating.

    ReplyDelete