Letting non graduates walk????

[drjonah]

http://www.limaohio.com/news/news/15...n-Lima-schools


Ok so this was in my local paper recently. Apparently there's a petition going around from parents that EVERYBODY should be able to walk in the graduation ceremony, even if they don't qualify for graduation.

The parents are saying the kids who failed should just get a blank diploma.

[mjr]

The parents are saying the kids who failed should just get a blank diploma.

Everyone gets a trophy!

And why do the parents think this way? Sorry, if you're not eligible to graduate, you don't get to walk across the stage. If you're old enough to graduate high school, you're old enough to learn a few harsh lessons about life.

I get if something happened where you had to miss some school (a relative's illness, whatever), but if it's because you failed a class, sorry, you don't get to walk. If that means you "miss out" on that moment in life, so be it.

I hope that's not too harsh.

There was a story here where I live a few years back about how some school district was going to implement a grade "floor". In other words, regardless of how you did on something, the lowest grade you could get was a 50 out of 100.

In certain circumstances, I'm for allowing for "make-up" work and re-tests and whatnot, but if you only get 2 out of 10 questions right, guess what, in my opinion you get a 20 instead of a 50.

I'm a heartless bastard, sometimes.

[Kheldarson]

There was a story here where I live a few years back about how some school district was going to implement a grade "floor". In other words, regardless of how you did on something, the lowest grade you could get was a 50 out of 100.

In certain circumstances, I'm for allowing for "make-up" work and re-tests and whatnot, but if you only get 2 out of 10 questions right, guess what, in my opinion you get a 20 instead of a 50.

There's a reason for that. It helps the kids who are floating in the middle and get a few bad grades. It's easier to recover from a 50 or 60 than anything lower. So students feel like they can actually improve their grade and try.

Those who want to fail still will, of course.

[Aragarthiel]

This is just one of the worst ideas ever. You're giving the kids who graduate one chance to walk, and the ones who fail might get two or three chances before dropping out. If it's such a special moment in life, why should students who fail get more chances than those who passed?

The only exception should be for students with alternate learning plans that don't officially pass but have met requirements for their graduation. My stepbrother was one of those students and received a Certificate of Attendance instead of a diploma.

[Andara Bledin]

Just a note, but kids who aren't actually graduating walk already.

This isn't new.

Now, typically, this is for kids who are a few points away and who are going to earn that in summer school.

For kids who have to take another year of classes, it's a bit silly.

Then again, I find graduation to be a huge colossal waste of time, anyway and would have skipped my own if it weren't for the fact that as a member of the band, I was playing in it. >_>

[s_stabeler]

yeah, if it's a case that someone is still going to be graduating that year, then let them walk at Graduation. If they are being kept back a year? don't let them walk/

[Rageaholic]

yeah, if it's a case that someone is still going to be graduating that year, then let them walk at Graduation. If they are being kept back a year? don't let them walk/

Pretty much this. I am one course away from completing a Bachlor's Degree and while I didn't attend the ceremony, I had the option to.

With these kids, it sounds like they did good in everything else, but struggled in one area. I don't think it's that unreasonable to ask that they be allowed to walk, although I wouldn't vilify the school for saying no either.

[Andara Bledin]

It's worth noting that in the case in the OP, this is some sort of graduation test that the kids have to pass, not a matter of not having taken enough credits or having failed out of a course, and in this specific case, the results were not available until really late, meaning that those kids who needed to get help and retake the test were unable to do so.

This is even more trivial than kids who have to make up classes over the summer, and I can see no reason other than pissant authoritarianism to not allow those who are likely to pass the test if given some tutoring and another session.

The graduation ceremony will only happen once for these kids. There is no next year. The person responding commented that they'd do something like some recognition ceremony for them, as if that's anything close to the same thing. Otherwise she seems to just be throwing up her hands and saying "well, what can you do?" when she knows exactly what she can do, she just doesn't want to be the one to make the decision.

[mjr]

There's a reason for that. It helps the kids who are floating in the middle and get a few bad grades. It's easier to recover from a 50 or 60 than anything lower. So students feel like they can actually improve their grade and try.

Those who want to fail still will, of course.

And this is "fair" because?

Why not just make the floor 70, then? That way no one fails.

[Tama]

And then you have people who don't CARE, and are going to get a 49 average and be happy with it...makes no sense.

[Kheldarson]

And this is "fair" because?

Why not just make the floor 70, then? That way no one fails.

It's fair because you're still providing opportunity to succeed.

One 0 means that the next three 100s are scrap. And you still only walk away with a 75. Let that 0 become a 50 and now the next three 100s means your grade's an 82. It becomes an incentive to try harder because you're more likely to succeed. And if you're more likely to succeed, you're more likely to learn.

And if you're really dead set on failing by refusing to do work at all, your grade will reflect that.

[Rageaholic]

It's worth noting that in the case in the OP, this is some sort of graduation test that the kids have to pass, not a matter of not having taken enough credits or having failed out of a course, and in this specific case, the results were not available until really late, meaning that those kids who needed to get help and retake the test were unable to do so.

This is even more trivial than kids who have to make up classes over the summer, and I can see no reason other than pissant authoritarianism to not allow those who are likely to pass the test if given some tutoring and another session.

The graduation ceremony will only happen once for these kids. There is no next year. The person responding commented that they'd do something like some recognition ceremony for them, as if that's anything close to the same thing. Otherwise she seems to just be throwing up her hands and saying "well, what can you do?" when she knows exactly what she can do, she just doesn't want to be the one to make the decision.

It sounds like they have a shitty system for graduation then. I agree then, there's no reason not to let them walk. It's not that strawman of letting everyone win as they'll still have to retake the test for the diploma.

And this is "fair" because?

Why not just make the floor 70, then? That way no one fails.

Because letting no one fail isn't the intention. The intention is to give those who do poorly at the start a chance to catch up without being overwhelmed. It's counterproductive to flunk a student just because they did lousy at the start of the term.

Don't get me wrong, it sounds like there are better ways of doing this (like those professors who let you drop the lowest test score). But I understand why they'd do this.

[mjr]

It's fair because you're still providing opportunity to succeed.

Riiiiight...the same "failure of an opportunity to succeed" can happen with a 60. Or a 65.

But hey, to be fair, why don't we put a ceiling on grades, too? We let kids get over 100 in classes. Why don't we cap it at 100?

But beyond that, Let's consider: 350/4 = 87.5, assuming you get 3 100's and a 50.

But, 300/4 = 75, which is still passing. So yes, that's still passing.

One 0 means that the next three 100s are scrap. And you still only walk away with a 75. Let that 0 become a 50 and now the next three 100s means your grade's an 82. It becomes an incentive to try harder because you're more likely to succeed.

Or perhaps you see the 0, and decide to try harder, too. I get this argument if it's college work, where you don't have a lot of assignments. But if you're in grade school or High School, where you have a BUNCH of assignments and plenty of opportunities...

I know we're all different, but when I was 16, I had a job where I was working 35-40 hours a week, AND school, AND extracurriculars. I still made B's.

And if you're really dead set on failing by refusing to do work at all, your grade will reflect that.

Yes. And you'll get 50's, instead of whatever grade you deserve.

[mjr]

I
Because letting no one fail isn't the intention. The intention is to give those who do poorly at the start a chance to catch up without being overwhelmed.

That's the thing...it isn't just at the start. It's at any point. So your last grade of the class could be a 0.

[Kheldarson]

That's the thing...it isn't just at the start. It's at any point. So your last grade of the class could be a 0.

This is true, but the point of school isn't to fail kids. It's to get them to learn.

So say you're a kid who's been messing around and fucked up. Several 0s in a row bad. You get the come to God lecture and decide to change things. Except...there's not enough time or grades to bring it up to passing anymore. Do you try?

For most kids, the answer is no, because if they aren't going to pass anyway, then what's the difference? But bring the grades to a 50 or 60, that's recoverable. That you can get a pass on. And more kids try and, therefore, learn.