The Minuteman: The Official Newspaper of Newark Academy since 1940

The Minuteman

The Official Newark Academy Newspaper

Is the Grading System Fair?

—

by

jfaber12
in

By Rebecca Tolpin ’14, Staff Writer


Would you rather have Mr. Bitler… (Photograph captured by Josh Faber, Edited by Priyam Parikh '12)



…or Ms. Hone? (Photograph captured by Josh Faber, Edited by Priyam Parikh '12)

As all Newark Academy students know, some teachers are more difficult graders than others.  One student could float through math or English one year only to struggle with the same subject the next year. In fact, the process of assigning teachers to students becomes a form of educational lottery.  If you do not draw a winning ticket, this could mean an extra hour of homework each day and a lower grade. Students should be aware that they will face deviations from what is considered fair throughout their lives. In order to alleviate this specific problem, Newark Academy should perhaps consider a grading system based on a curve across all classes of the same subject.

Grading on a curve would give each student an equal chance to earn a good grade, regardless of the difficulty level of their teacher’s grading.  Even with the curve, students with more difficult teachers would spend longer hours studying than other students, but at least they would know that their effort would have better results.

Many colleges grade on a curve because it is proven to be a fairer grading system. For example, in the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, most classes are graded on a bell curve. In this type of grading system the teacher chooses one grade that is the average grade, and then grades around it. Most students score in the average, and only a few of them score poorly. It helps the college students because no matter how difficult the test is the students still know that they can attain an acceptable score, even if the average grade is very low. Grades are especially important for college students because it could be the difference between getting their first dream job or not.  At Newark Academy too, despite some of the school’s more lofty ideals about education, grades do matter. Grades affect students’ eligibility for higher classes and show up on college resumes, thus directly affecting the future of the students.

Putting grades on a curve levels the playing field. Each student has an equal opportunity to do well.  This knowledge would reduce students’ stress and anxiety and make them feel more proud when all their hours spent studying finally pay off. Schools should help students shape their futures by giving them this highly effective opportunity to succeed.

Comments

6 responses to “Is the Grading System Fair?”

  1. Carissa Szlosek '12 Avatar
    Carissa Szlosek ’12

    People shouldn’t use the grading system as a scapegoat for the reason they didn’t get into the college of their choice. In the words of Mr. Bitler, “Study hard and own the material.”

    P.S. Picture of Das Bitler giving out an ‘A’? I think it’s time to retract his “Meanest Teacher Award.”

    1. Mr. Bitler Avatar
      Mr. Bitler

      Carissa, Carissa – The picture is of me taking the A AWAY from a student! I’m still in the running…

      Mr. Bitler

  2. Ms. Acquadro Avatar
    Ms. Acquadro

    Check out this link from the May 14, 2011 edition of the fact-based newspaper THE NEW YORK TIMES: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/opinion/15arum.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=quality%20of%20college%20education&st=cse.

    Among the points made in the article about how little undergraduates are doing or gaining from their college education, the following:

    Researchers ” found that large numbers of the students were making their way through college with minimal exposure to rigorous coursework, only a modest investment of effort and little or no meaningful improvement in skills like writing and reasoning.

    In a typical semester, for instance, 32 percent of the students did not take a single course with more than 40 pages of reading per week, and 50 percent did not take any course requiring more than 20 pages of writing over the semester. The average student spent only about 12 to 13 hours per week studying — about half the time a full-time college student in 1960 spent studying.”

    A quotation from Rebecca’s article about the fairness of grading at Newark Academy is as follows: ” One student could float through math or English one year only to struggle with the same subject the next year. In fact, the process of assigning teachers to students becomes a form of educational lottery. If you do not draw a winning ticket, this could mean an extra hour of homework each day and a lower grade.” In this excerpt, Rebecca seems to suggest that a student could do very little (“float through”) in one teacher’s class one year and get a good grade, but the next year, after failing to win the teacher lottery, might actually be challenged and have to work to earn a good grade. The article seems to suggest a good grade is the goal, not the education itself.

    Rebecca’s solution to this pesky problem of “hard teachers” and losing the teacher lottery and landing up with an extra hour of homework? “Grading on a curve would give each student an equal chance to earn a good grade, regardless of the difficulty level of their teacher’s grading.” In other words, she suggests, teachers should inflate or manipulate grades. Then everybody would be special. Sounds like the plot of “The Incredibles.”.

    THE TIMES article, backed by years of research, asserts the obvious: the less a student does, the less he learns. Becoming educated requires effort–and that’s not always fun or easy.

    Good grades are the result of hard work, consistent effort and yes, some innate ability. Hard facts for lots of high school students to face, no doubt. It’s much easier to blame the teacher for the bad grades.

    1. Mr. Hawk Avatar
      Mr. Hawk

      Why do students complain about some grades, and not others? The answer, I think, lies in two factors. First, they need to know what constitutes “good work.” Secondly, they need to know if their work measures up.

      Every year I invite students to sit with me while I grade their papers. Every year I have a few students who sit down with me and tell me that the have generated brilliant, superior, exceptional, innovative, and thrilling work. Every year, when I start to read their work out loud, I turn to find exactly the same students hiding under the table, cowering in fear of hearing their lousy prose or facile logic read aloud. Or, to be even more honest about it, ninety-five percent of those brilliant, superior, exceptional, innovative, and thrilling students are cowering. The remainder of these paragons are sitting at the table, trying to shout over the sound of my voice. Why? They are angry that I am reading what they wrote, rather than giving voice to what they “really” meant. It is frustrating to sit with me, because I am either clearly malicious (refusing to give them their due) or unintelligent (because I am wedded to the text). I am rarely popular with this crowd.

      Of course, the surface lesson of this story is clear: those who can face their limitations, and who understand they need to improve will improve. Those who cannot face their limitations tend to have a harder time.

      But there is a second lesson here about learning. Very few students actually refuse to acknowledge their limitations. Most Newark Academy students, I think, will do whatever it takes to improve, so long as they know what must be improved, and how to go about it. It rarely takes more than one or two sessions for even the most brilliant, innovative, superior student to change their tune and get to work.

      So what do students usually mean when they say a teacher is “hard”? When students are talking about a “hard” teacher, they may mean one of three things. First, they may mean a teacher with clear, but very high expectations. This kind of hard teacher is the teacher we all want, and we will give hours of our time to this teacher’s demands because we understand that the teacher can and will help us improve. Secondly, however, they may be referring to a teacher who has an unclear set of standards, and who is therefore impossible to please. A third alternative is a teacher who has clear standards, but who is unable to provide meaningful advice as to how to improve. And we can see a similar pattern for easy teachers. An easy teacher may be a teacher who awards As for attending class regularly. Alternatively, an easy teacher may be a teacher who is very effective at scaffolding student achievement, and students don’t mind working hard because they feel they are getting somewhere.

      The direction forward to me seems to be clear. Students need clear models (an “A” paper, an “A” lab, and “A” test) to know what they are expected to do. And once the model is established, it is pointless to start playing games with class curves because the standard for excellence is independent of the comparative competence of the students in the class. A class might genuinely be like Lake Woebegone (everybody above average). And that is fair.

      1. Jake Okinow '12 Avatar
        Jake Okinow ’12

        Mr. Hawk, What would your advice be for a student with either teacher 2 or 3?

        What if the clear models of an “A” assessment are significantly different for the two teachers teaching the same class?

        What if hypothetically there are two teachers, A and B. The average grade in teacher A’s two sections of 9th grade history class is a 92. the average grade in teacher B’s two sections of 9th grade history class is an 85. Would you say that the students in Teacher A’s classes were systematically smarter than the students in Teacher B’s classes or would you think there was a difference in grading policy or expectations.

        A grading curve might not be the answer but I know something similar to this has happened and I find that to be unfair. How would you respond if evidence of something like this was brought to your attention.

  3. Mr. Hawk Avatar
    Mr. Hawk

    I think we are starting this conversation from different originating points. Your comment indicates that grades equate to being “systematically smarter.” That is not my experience. I tend to think that grades have a much higher correlation to an effective work ethic than they do raw intelligence.

    As I have thought about grading, it seems to me that we are measuring certain kinds of performance, not ability. Performance, then, can be trained. True, some people acquire the skills faster than others, but most schooling is coachable. For example, what constitutes a well-written paper? Certainly, I think, virtuosity plays a role, but so does training.

    I would hope that the teachers of the same class have commonly agreed on models of excellence. At Newark Academy, teachers frequently cross-grade their assessments to be certain that everyone is on the same page as to what is expected. Externally assessed courses (IB), of course, have internationally established models, which make things even easier. Assuming that this has happened, I would conclude that the students who scored a 92 has done a more effective job mastering the expectations than did the 85 class.

    Of course, if there is no agreement on standards, then we DO have a problem.

Leave a Reply