Could not agree more. I talk to my teachers constantly about the importance of quizzing.
However, Feldman is right about the unfairness of giving zeros, and the argument against them has nothing to do with social justice — it’s basic math and a fundamental understanding of what grades reflect.
When students earned zeroes, they mostly tried to make up assignments that they hadn’t done. When we gave 50s for missing work, they realized they could pass by doing only a few assignments.
The argument works the other way: zeros artificially pull down averages and in turn depress a student’s motivation since they see they are so far in the hole they can’t get out.
But motivation aside on a 100 point scale zeroes are 1)unethical and 2) make no mathematical sense.
90-100 - A
80-89 - B
70-79 - C
60-69 - D
0-59 - F
Why should students have 50% more opportunity to fail than pass?
They shouldn’t. That’s why most grading scales bottom out at 50. Thus, a 30 doesn’t exist on the scale. Framed differently: move the scale from 0-100 to 0-50.
For a final (e.g. quarter grade), I agree. But which teachers give zeroes to turned-in assignments? Chances are that a truly miserable or rather lack of effort will yield a 50%. My 24-year classroom experience shows that when zeroes - for not doing ANYTHING - go in the grade book, the students mostly try to get rid of those zeroes. When we gave 50s for nothing, many more students did almost nothing.
But still those zeroes artificially drag down a grade, and so if they don’t exist on the scale, it’s not fair.
The better solution is to mark the assignments as “missing” or “incomplete,” with the grade book weighting them at 50s (if the grading scale is 0-100.)
Could not agree more. I talk to my teachers constantly about the importance of quizzing.
However, Feldman is right about the unfairness of giving zeros, and the argument against them has nothing to do with social justice — it’s basic math and a fundamental understanding of what grades reflect.
When students earned zeroes, they mostly tried to make up assignments that they hadn’t done. When we gave 50s for missing work, they realized they could pass by doing only a few assignments.
The argument works the other way: zeros artificially pull down averages and in turn depress a student’s motivation since they see they are so far in the hole they can’t get out.
But motivation aside on a 100 point scale zeroes are 1)unethical and 2) make no mathematical sense.
90-100 - A
80-89 - B
70-79 - C
60-69 - D
0-59 - F
Why should students have 50% more opportunity to fail than pass?
They shouldn’t. That’s why most grading scales bottom out at 50. Thus, a 30 doesn’t exist on the scale. Framed differently: move the scale from 0-100 to 0-50.
40-50 - A
30 - 39 - B
20 - 29 - C
10- 19 - D
0 -9 - F
On this scale, that 30 would be a -20.
Which anyone can see is absurd.
For a final (e.g. quarter grade), I agree. But which teachers give zeroes to turned-in assignments? Chances are that a truly miserable or rather lack of effort will yield a 50%. My 24-year classroom experience shows that when zeroes - for not doing ANYTHING - go in the grade book, the students mostly try to get rid of those zeroes. When we gave 50s for nothing, many more students did almost nothing.
I can’t really disagree with that.
But still those zeroes artificially drag down a grade, and so if they don’t exist on the scale, it’s not fair.
The better solution is to mark the assignments as “missing” or “incomplete,” with the grade book weighting them at 50s (if the grading scale is 0-100.)
Look into competency based instruction and/or personalized systems of instruction.