|
I always scored each hw with however many points I wanted - usually 2, 1 or 0 (check +, check or zero) to make grading easier. Then the total points were normalized so max score would add up to the percentage of the course I had specified in the syllabus - ex: 15% of course grade (never did more than 20 total hw points - as a student I always hated hw). Then I made the tests add up to the rest (ex: 40 points mid-term and 45 points final).
As far as other policies, I also offered extra credit weekly - they had the option of writing a paragraph on a topic of their choosing that was relevant to what I was covering (total maybe 15-20% - but nobody ever got full extra-credit). There was a word limit - 250 words or I would not read it (no, I never actually counted them). No late assignments were graded - this was college and people should be responsible enough at that age.
When all scores were added up, if needed, there was a total course curve.
PS - A few more class management comments... The "demoralizing" effect you worry about is only an issue when students perceive your actions as breaking the original "deal", as unfair or arbitrary. If you clearly state from day 1 that late means late, its never an issue. In fact, I strongly recommend that on day 1 you go out and make the course sound a bit tougher and stricter than you plan it to be. It is always possible to ease off later on (and the students will be happy!), but very hard to do the opposite. Finally, explain that the course rules are there for everyone, and relaxing them for one student is unfair to the rest of the group, so they shouldn't expect that. Again, you may choose to relax them anyway later on, but the baseline should not be that.
|
On November 04 2009 04:05 Xeris wrote:
And ya there's the work ethic component. Sure you could have a smart kid who doesn't need to do the homework to get an A in the class, so your system would reward him for being lazy basically. That's not how life works though. If he's in a work situation and misses his deadline there's nothing he can do, he'll get fired, etc. Your proposed system basically rewards coasting, which is a bad lesson to teach to high schoolers.
I disagree with this. When I was in HS I didnt do many assignments because I saw no educational value in them. I gained nothing by completing them except for a grade that I didnt care about. In the real world you only need to do what is necessary to complete the job. Not a bunch of extra filler material that is designed for the soul purpose of eating up your time.
If I am going to gain something from an assignment, I will do it. Which is exactly what happened when I was university. In HS I probably did 30% of my assignments and in University it was more like 98%.
I did what work I needed to do in order to understand the material and ace the exams. And that is exactly how it works in the real world. If you need to know how to use a certain computer program to do your job your boss isnt going to make you take the training course for that program if you already know how to use it, but in high school they would force you to do it anyways. The HS system is totally broken in my opinion. It is a fucking joke. It is designed so any idiot can pass which makes it extremely boring and unrewarding for those people that are intelligent.
|
On November 04 2009 03:58 Anihc wrote:
I always thought it was about preparing kids for the real world. In the real world, if you don't meet a deadline, you're fucked.
In the real world, everyone misses deadlines constantly. A few industries are exceptions, but not the rule.
|
Kau
Canada3500 Posts
In the school world, you screw up a calculation about bridge construction on an exam and lose a few marks.
In the real world, you screw up a calculation for bridge construction and people lose their lives.
|
On November 04 2009 05:53 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 04:05 Xeris wrote:
And ya there's the work ethic component. Sure you could have a smart kid who doesn't need to do the homework to get an A in the class, so your system would reward him for being lazy basically. That's not how life works though. If he's in a work situation and misses his deadline there's nothing he can do, he'll get fired, etc. Your proposed system basically rewards coasting, which is a bad lesson to teach to high schoolers.
I disagree with this. When I was in HS I didnt do many assignments because I saw no educational value in them. I gained nothing by completing them except for a grade that I didnt care about. In the real world you only need to do what is necessary to complete the job. Not a bunch of extra filler material that is designed for the soul purpose of eating up your time. If I am going to gain something from an assignment, I will do it. Which is exactly what happened when I was university. In HS I probably did 30% of my assignments and in University it was more like 98%. I did what work I needed to do in order to understand the material and ace the exams. And that is exactly how it works in the real world. If you need to know how to use a certain computer program to do your job your boss isnt going to make you take the training course for that program if you already know how to use it, but in high school they would force you to do it anyways. The HS system is totally broken in my opinion. It is a fucking joke. It is designed so any idiot can pass which makes it extremely boring and unrewarding for those people that are intelligent.
The point of the assignments isn't actually learning something. In very few college majors (aside maybe from engineering and hard sciences) you don't learn actual job skills. As a Poli Sci major - I've learned absolutely nothing in my classes that is making my job (researching at a Think Tank) easier. The point of school assignments is to teach you work ethic, responsibility, etc.
|
On November 04 2009 05:36 Athos wrote:
I agree with this. Pretty much every class I didn't do well in was because I had a teacher who really pissed me off and discouraged me from applying myself.
That's a huge cop-out. "Ya I could be a straight A student but it's my teacher's fault I got a bad grade". Bullshit.
|
On November 04 2009 06:08 Xeris wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 05:36 Athos wrote:
I agree with this. Pretty much every class I didn't do well in was because I had a teacher who really pissed me off and discouraged me from applying myself. That's a huge cop-out. "Ya I could be a straight A student but it's my teacher's fault I got a bad grade". Bullshit.
You're both mixing two separate issues: how a class is taught vs. how its graded. If a teacher does a poor job at getting you interested and teaching, your performance will fall. However, this has nothing to do with how the course is graded: could be 1-10, A-F, with 2 exams or 5, with or without hw, etc. etc. As long as you have a fantastic teacher that is just administrative stuff.
|
On November 04 2009 06:13 citi.zen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 06:08 Xeris wrote:On November 04 2009 05:36 Athos wrote:
I agree with this. Pretty much every class I didn't do well in was because I had a teacher who really pissed me off and discouraged me from applying myself. That's a huge cop-out. "Ya I could be a straight A student but it's my teacher's fault I got a bad grade". Bullshit. You're both mixing two separate issues: how a class is taught vs. how its graded. If a teacher does a poor job at getting you interested and teaching, your performance will fall. However, this has nothing to do with how the course is graded: could be 1-10, A-F, with 2 exams or 5, with or without hw, etc. etc. As long as you have a fantastic teacher that is just administrative stuff.
No, what he's doing is basically projecting blame on his teachers for poor performances. Maybe it's true from time to time, but at some point you need to take responsibility for your own actions and you can't continually blame other people for your shortcomings.
|
On November 04 2009 05:57 ShadowDrgn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 03:58 Anihc wrote:
I always thought it was about preparing kids for the real world. In the real world, if you don't meet a deadline, you're fucked. In the real world, everyone misses deadlines constantly. A few industries are exceptions, but not the rule.
Have fun explaining that to your boss when he firmly plants his foot up your ass and fires you.
If a student straight up doesn't do an assignment, how can you possibly expect them to receive anything other than a zero? It's demoralizing? How about the kid who busted his ass, got a 95% and sees that kid pull a 65 because the teacher felt bad that he didn't do a single thing? It will just continue to breed laziness.
With a few exceptions, there should always be a late policy that allows a student to make up work but heavily penalizes them. Shit happens, it's college, not a real job etc... but it's still not fair to prop up the lazy kids and let the smart, hard working ones bust their ass. Each day late cuts a quarter off the grade is more than adequate. The lazy students are reprimanded but have an opportunity to rectify the situation, and the other ones are rewarded with good grades for a job done well.
I can't even fathom how educated people thing rewarding laziness is going to make it go away.
|
If you miss the deadline by less than 24 hours - 20% off, more than 24 hours - 0.
The rest of the system is fine. If you don't turn it in at all - you get a 0, end of discussion.
By the time you get to university you shouldn't be emotionally affected by some arbitrary numbers some grad student assigns you for homework and if you are - you're there for the wrong reasons.
Maybe it will cause some people to shut down or fail the course, but that's just life, you can withdraw from the course with a W or take it again later with another professor.
|
I'm a kid in college. When I miss an assignment (or I'm unaware I owe one) then I'm basically done with that class for the day. Whether I like it or not, my brain shuts down and until I feel I'm in control again I don't participate or learn anywhere near as effectively.
I completely agree with the OP so far.
|
Very true, a zero is a death blow. My chem teacher would give out zero's on labs if your results weren't correct so even though my test average was a 98, 2 or 3 lab zeros brought me down to an 89.7 and she didn't round :/. What I think is even worse though is teachers who do hw on a check/check minus (50)/ zero scale because their no wiggle room. If you skip one problem theres no where to go but to failing. Also bad, being able to opt into weighted courses for everything except gym/health and then still being expected to treat it as a real class
|
On November 04 2009 06:24 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 05:57 ShadowDrgn wrote:On November 04 2009 03:58 Anihc wrote:
I always thought it was about preparing kids for the real world. In the real world, if you don't meet a deadline, you're fucked. In the real world, everyone misses deadlines constantly. A few industries are exceptions, but not the rule. Have fun explaining that to your boss when he firmly plants his foot up your ass and fires you. If a student straight up doesn't do an assignment, how can you possibly expect them to receive anything other than a zero? It's demoralizing? How about the kid who busted his ass, got a 95% and sees that kid pull a 65 because the teacher felt bad that he didn't do a single thing? It will just continue to breed laziness. With a few exceptions, there should always be a late policy that allows a student to make up work but heavily penalizes them. Shit happens, it's college, not a real job etc... but it's still not fair to prop up the lazy kids and let the smart, hard working ones bust their ass. Each day late cuts a quarter off the grade is more than adequate. The lazy students are reprimanded but have an opportunity to rectify the situation, and the other ones are rewarded with good grades for a job done well. I can't even fathom how educated people thing rewarding laziness is going to make it go away.
No-one is asking anyone to just give someone 65% because the teacher in question felt bad.
|
On November 04 2009 03:52 BanZu wrote:
YES, I hate forgetting stuff and getting an automatic 0.
It's such a blow to morale.
Regarding this matter, I'd reduce the maximum grade possible rather than not accepting any late homework.
I'd wear this on a T-shirt if it existed
|
On November 04 2009 06:47 KurtistheTurtle wrote:
I'm a kid in college.
There's your problem. Until you wake up and realize you gotta find a way to make up for that zero and step up, you're wasting your parents (or your) money. You're not gonna graduate being immature...
Micro, there's a huge difference between high school and college and even middle school and high school, both in curriculum and maturity. For argument's sake, it should probably only consider college.
|
On November 04 2009 06:57 timmeh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 06:24 Hawk wrote:On November 04 2009 05:57 ShadowDrgn wrote:On November 04 2009 03:58 Anihc wrote:
I always thought it was about preparing kids for the real world. In the real world, if you don't meet a deadline, you're fucked. In the real world, everyone misses deadlines constantly. A few industries are exceptions, but not the rule. Have fun explaining that to your boss when he firmly plants his foot up your ass and fires you. If a student straight up doesn't do an assignment, how can you possibly expect them to receive anything other than a zero? It's demoralizing? How about the kid who busted his ass, got a 95% and sees that kid pull a 65 because the teacher felt bad that he didn't do a single thing? It will just continue to breed laziness. With a few exceptions, there should always be a late policy that allows a student to make up work but heavily penalizes them. Shit happens, it's college, not a real job etc... but it's still not fair to prop up the lazy kids and let the smart, hard working ones bust their ass. Each day late cuts a quarter off the grade is more than adequate. The lazy students are reprimanded but have an opportunity to rectify the situation, and the other ones are rewarded with good grades for a job done well. I can't even fathom how educated people thing rewarding laziness is going to make it go away. No-one is asking anyone to just give someone 65% because the teacher in question felt bad.
He's saying students should get something other than a zero for putting in zero effort. That's rewarding doing nothing.
|
the fundamental problem isn't with the grading system but the teaching curriculum and philosophy. small assignments distributed over a long period of time that add up to a final grade are incredibly demoralizing for me and i really see it as a way of encouraging mediocre consistency.
one of the classes i am currently taking uses an approach i really like. no assignments aside from 3 projects. lectures outline important parts of the book giving you foundation to build on with reading. you receive no help with projects whatsoever so you actually have to work and think to get the project done, you can't just get stuck and go crawling to professor. this method enables the course to provide the necessary information in lectures and encourages critical thinking without the tediousness of menial assignments.
many courses are far to reliant on the idea of assigning a grade and not focused enough on actual learning.
|
not turning in shit fucked me so hard. Mostly because i was disorganized and in general i am very scatterbrained. lost probably at least 1000 points on assignments forn ot turning them in during high school. doing a lot better in college now that i dont have to turn in hw and shit, just take test whee.
|
By the time you get to college, the little assignments don't matter anyway. Most of my chemistry classes assign homework, but it is not even collected - and when it is, its only 10% of the grade.
Nobody is going to forget an important assignment like a research project or term paper, that would just be idiotic. If someone does, they probably shouldn't be in the class in the first place.
Regardless, unless you are going to a graduate or professional school, I don't think that your university GPA matters too much.
|
On November 04 2009 07:06 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2009 06:57 timmeh wrote:On November 04 2009 06:24 Hawk wrote:On November 04 2009 05:57 ShadowDrgn wrote:On November 04 2009 03:58 Anihc wrote:
I always thought it was about preparing kids for the real world. In the real world, if you don't meet a deadline, you're fucked. In the real world, everyone misses deadlines constantly. A few industries are exceptions, but not the rule. Have fun explaining that to your boss when he firmly plants his foot up your ass and fires you. If a student straight up doesn't do an assignment, how can you possibly expect them to receive anything other than a zero? It's demoralizing? How about the kid who busted his ass, got a 95% and sees that kid pull a 65 because the teacher felt bad that he didn't do a single thing? It will just continue to breed laziness. With a few exceptions, there should always be a late policy that allows a student to make up work but heavily penalizes them. Shit happens, it's college, not a real job etc... but it's still not fair to prop up the lazy kids and let the smart, hard working ones bust their ass. Each day late cuts a quarter off the grade is more than adequate. The lazy students are reprimanded but have an opportunity to rectify the situation, and the other ones are rewarded with good grades for a job done well. I can't even fathom how educated people thing rewarding laziness is going to make it go away. No-one is asking anyone to just give someone 65% because the teacher in question felt bad. He's saying students should get something other than a zero for putting in zero effort. That's rewarding doing nothing.
He is suggesting a system where a single missed/failed assignment will not instantly result in the inability to compete for a pass in your subject. The person with 95% who busted his ass to get it won't care whether some lazy-ass got 65% or not. He busted his ass, he knows how to work the material. Someone who managed to wiggle himself through with 65% is no competition for him. I understand this is somewhat arbitrary, because what about someone else who didn't screw up (bad performance or no work at all) and only got 65%?
I guess you have to draw the line somewhere. I think the policy of being able to drop the worst of the total number of assignments is good. Everyone screws up once in a while. Having a cut throat policy is wasted resources and wasted potential.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
