This would’ve been a godsend to me tbh. I was really bad about completing buzywork homework assignments but I paid attention in class and already understood the material. In high school I’d ace every test and wind up with a C or worse because of the number of missing assignments, it wasn’t even intentional, I just frequently forgot about them because they weren’t interesting and probably because of some kind of undiagnosed neurodivergence. Of course, there are also kids who might struggle to complete assignments due to complicated home lives.
I don’t think making an incomplete count as a 50 is really making grades meaningless. A 50 is still going to hurt you, it just doesn’t drag your grade into oblivion. If a student gets 100 on three assignments and misses a fourth, is a grade of 75 really the most accurate representation of how well they understand the material? Counting the incomplete as a 50 would make that an 87.
Sprinkling in zeros can really drag your grade down and can make it feel like your grade doesn’t really have much to do with your understanding of the material, and has more to do with being willing and able to work outside of school hours (or to just copy down answers from a friend five minutes before class, which I also didn’t do).
Exactly. It also gives students the ability to improve and not just give up.
Let’s assume 10 assignments determine your grade in a class. You completely skip the first 4 assignments and get 0%. If you completely turn around and score 100% on the next 6 assignments, your overall grade is 60% and you fail the class.
But! If you were the student who skipped the first 4 assignments, what incentive do you have to even try and improve?
The 50% score is to give students without hope a chance. If it’s college level, sure maybe failing is the best option. But high school? Middle school? Even younger? Give kids a chance to improve.
Assignments are not evidence of learning. Assignments are pressure for students to learn. They are motivation to spend time acquiring knowledge and practicing skills expected to be acquired from the class.
For students who master this knowledge and skill without that pressure, assignments are distractions from further study. They force the student to expend time and energy on previously-mastered material, rather than allowing them to focus on unmastered subjects or additional classes.
If I were building a grading rubric, I would say that the test score at the end of each unit is the minimum score recorded for any assignment in that unit. My tests would be killers: I would target 80% raw scores, but final test scores would be on a curve, with the median score being recorded as an “A”.
Score a 100% raw score on a unit test, and every assignment for that unit is raised to 100%. The student has demonstrated complete mastery of the subject matter; any grade less than 100% does not reflect their true capability.
Score an 80% raw score on the unit test, and every assignment for that unit is at least an 80%. A 95% assignment stays a 95%, but a 45% assignment is counted as 80%. Missing assignments are counted as 80%, not 0%.
I would go further: the raw score on the final exam replaces every lower grade in the grade book. You ace that indomitable horror of a final exam, you ace the class, regardless of how much effort you put in.
This is called grading for equity. It is really hard to do with short attention kids needing instant gratification. The question “is this graded?” being asked for every assignment shows their mindset. If you carefully explain that they will improve the tested skill with the practice, they lose all interest and score poorly on assessment if they even try. The learned need for progress points stymies equitable grading. The majority of students see schooling as a grind for points. They want to earn just enough points to level up without actually retaining skills so they can get back on TikTok.
This would’ve been a godsend to me tbh. I was really bad about completing buzywork homework assignments but I paid attention in class and already understood the material. In high school I’d ace every test and wind up with a C or worse because of the number of missing assignments, it wasn’t even intentional, I just frequently forgot about them because they weren’t interesting and probably because of some kind of undiagnosed neurodivergence. Of course, there are also kids who might struggle to complete assignments due to complicated home lives.
I don’t think making an incomplete count as a 50 is really making grades meaningless. A 50 is still going to hurt you, it just doesn’t drag your grade into oblivion. If a student gets 100 on three assignments and misses a fourth, is a grade of 75 really the most accurate representation of how well they understand the material? Counting the incomplete as a 50 would make that an 87.
Sprinkling in zeros can really drag your grade down and can make it feel like your grade doesn’t really have much to do with your understanding of the material, and has more to do with being willing and able to work outside of school hours (or to just copy down answers from a friend five minutes before class, which I also didn’t do).
Exactly. It also gives students the ability to improve and not just give up.
Let’s assume 10 assignments determine your grade in a class. You completely skip the first 4 assignments and get 0%. If you completely turn around and score 100% on the next 6 assignments, your overall grade is 60% and you fail the class.
But! If you were the student who skipped the first 4 assignments, what incentive do you have to even try and improve?
The 50% score is to give students without hope a chance. If it’s college level, sure maybe failing is the best option. But high school? Middle school? Even younger? Give kids a chance to improve.
Assignments are not evidence of learning. Assignments are pressure for students to learn. They are motivation to spend time acquiring knowledge and practicing skills expected to be acquired from the class.
For students who master this knowledge and skill without that pressure, assignments are distractions from further study. They force the student to expend time and energy on previously-mastered material, rather than allowing them to focus on unmastered subjects or additional classes.
If I were building a grading rubric, I would say that the test score at the end of each unit is the minimum score recorded for any assignment in that unit. My tests would be killers: I would target 80% raw scores, but final test scores would be on a curve, with the median score being recorded as an “A”.
Score a 100% raw score on a unit test, and every assignment for that unit is raised to 100%. The student has demonstrated complete mastery of the subject matter; any grade less than 100% does not reflect their true capability.
Score an 80% raw score on the unit test, and every assignment for that unit is at least an 80%. A 95% assignment stays a 95%, but a 45% assignment is counted as 80%. Missing assignments are counted as 80%, not 0%.
I would go further: the raw score on the final exam replaces every lower grade in the grade book. You ace that indomitable horror of a final exam, you ace the class, regardless of how much effort you put in.
This is called grading for equity. It is really hard to do with short attention kids needing instant gratification. The question “is this graded?” being asked for every assignment shows their mindset. If you carefully explain that they will improve the tested skill with the practice, they lose all interest and score poorly on assessment if they even try. The learned need for progress points stymies equitable grading. The majority of students see schooling as a grind for points. They want to earn just enough points to level up without actually retaining skills so they can get back on TikTok.