The teacher went from giving an F, to giving a B, and went from grading on sales of yearbooks to not grading on sales of yearbooks.
If that’s doubling down, I’d hate to see what capitulation looks like.
You’re literally suggesting that Crafter_Man should sue and bankrupt the teacher because his child got an A- for the year instead of an A.
When I took that class it was called ‘Driver’s Ed’.
It didn’t go well.
Am typing on phone, so I’ll provide more details later.
Two things drive me bonkers about my kids in high school.
No matter how much we tell our kids to make sure they understand the grading criteria and bring up concerns at the beginning of the tri - they don’t.
Teacher to parent communication is lousy. In most cases, I can’t see what the grading criteria are, or have insight into the assignments until they are past due. If my kids were self sufficient, this would be fine. But my son needs prodding and my daughter is flakey. So by the time I know that half their grade is some bullshit project they were supposed to be working on all tri, its too late.
Doubling down is sticking to the idea that a student’s grade is based on salesmenship and coudl be purchased. Capitulation would be having a grading system that is sane. So this is not because it’s an A-, but because the grading policy is arbitrary and capricous, and in violation of the student’s right to due process.
I ask the same question of you, what would be an appropriate consequence for the teacher and school for this dumbfuckery?
When is grading policy not arbitrary and capricious? Pretty much only when the grades are based on your ability to regurgitate static facts. Do you think grading a poem or a paper mache unicorn isn’t arbitrary?
We only complain about arbitrary and capricious when it doesn’t benefit us.
I’ve heard a bunch of complaints about how this system allows the wealthy to buy their kids good grades, but curiously nobody brought up how C_M’s daughter deserves a good grade because she’s the only student who owns Photoshop and learned how to use it on her own time.
Going forward, basing grades on ad sales is neither arbitrary nor capricious, it’s based on direct performance measures and in an field that is relevant to the success of the Yearbook project. Whether it’s advisable is a different story.
So if she needs to move an ad or two, let me know how much. I am willing buy a small square, and will crowd source a 'doper message if that gets her a proper grade.
This statement is profoundly ignorant. I teach Humanities, and my grading criteria are neither arbitrary nor capricious. Subjectivity is possible, but I (and my colleagues) work very hard to minimize the subjective element and to assign grades based on the quality of the work produced, taking a large number of factors into account.
These, by the way, do not include effort / how hard the student worked, since I cannot assess that accurately and it isn’t relevant to the final product.
Just so I’m clear, do you believe there should be any consequence to the teacher or the school for condoning this grading scheme?
Obviously I disagree with your assessment of the grading policy. I think social media would disagree. Put me on a jury and Crafter would win my vote.
Outrageous. Hope you manage to convince the fool that this is wrong. The very possibility to bribe yourself more ads and sales and thus increase your average exists which shouldn’t be possible.
Oh, phooey. This isn’t true at all. Are you confusing “is arbitrary and capricious” with “has an element of subjectivity”?
I don’t know about high school, but plenty of colleges and universities have policies about arbitrary and capricious grading. Here (pdf) and here are a couple of the first few examples that a quick google turned up.
#1 seems a bit vague. In this instance, it may be a matter of interpretation whether selling ads should be included in “performance in the course,” though IMHO it comes uncomfortably close to buying a grade, which would be clearly against such a policy.
If I understood Crafter Man correctly, #3 was violated in this instance, since the teacher didn’t specify up front that the course grade would be based on the students’ ability to sell. I don’t know if this applies to high school, but in college, all students are given a syllabus at the beginning of a course, that spells out what the course grade will be based on.
Part of me loves this idea, and would be more than willing to chip in, should it come to that.
Part of me doesn’t like it, because it feels like capitulating, playing along with the injustice. Plus, at this point it’s probably too late for something like this.
I’ll retract my statements on the issue of “arbitrary and capricious” grading based on the definition from your quote. While I sometimes think that subjective is analogous to arbitrary, in this context arbitrary has a more specific meaning that does not apply
You mean should they be fired or driven to bankruptcy? No.
The biggest difference between this grading and traditional grading is that it involves the real world and is not a completely theoretical consequence-free zone where mistakes only impact your grade.
Personally, I’d like to see more of a structured approach than a strict look at dollars and cents. Such as, ask the kids to come up with a plan of action to sell ads, document that plan as a team and then implement it.
Agreed - but I wanted to at least make the offer. I don’t like it, I disagree with it (based on all information provided), but if some cash from me helps - why not.
Yes, it’s a legal term as discussed in various caselaw around grading schemes. Students have a due process interest in their grade and that matter may be adjudicated by the court if the grading system is arbitrary or capricious.
You seem to be answering the question you think was asked, but not one which was actually asked. Is that on purpose?
Let me ask again, with emphasis this time: Do you believe there should be **any **consequence to the teacher or the school for condoning this grading scheme? If yes, what would be an appropriate example?
Not asked of me, but I’d like to chime in.
I think that the student should get to deceide whether or not to let that grade average into the previous 3 quarters. I think that would be about as fair as you could make it at this point.
Then the system of grades based on the selling of adds and yearbooks should be dropped. Do members in band class get graded on how many candy bars (or whatever) they sell for the trips they take?
Conceptually, including all aspects of successful publishing, from gathering content, editing, layout, printing and ad/unit sales in the grading scheme is OK in my book.
In practice, how you go about including these gradeable parts is where things can go to shit.
If the ad sale portion of the grade can be tied to the curriculum, involves the students learning something about this part of the publishing process, then I don’t think any consequences are needed. If it doesn’t meet this criteria, then the consequence is to fix it, the way I would expect any teacher to fix grading policy that isn’t up to snuff.
The problem is requiring actual sales. Actual sales depend on factors outside of the students’ control, i.e., the behavior of the client. And if solid leads aren’t given to the students, it’s going to depend heavily on who the student knows. A kid whose parents are solidly middle-class and who know several other adults who make ad-buying decisions for their business is much likelier to get a good grade than a kid whose parents are low-income and who don’t have connections to ad-buyers. That’s profoundly unfair.
The skills related to sales are real skills, and I have no problem with teaching them (that is, with others teaching them–I’m a terrible salesman). But you don’t measure them by counting sales. You measure them by observing them in action.
And maybe we can find out how much instruction in sales was provided in class. I’m guessing none.