As a teacher, I have the opportunity to impact the future adults of tomorrow, and to teach them socially responsible behavior. The caveat to this is when the school system undermines the attempts of the teacher to teach responsibility and accountability. What I am about to tell you is a true situation, and it screams of how we are educating our youth in mediocrity.
In a particular school in a particular system in a particular state, there is a period twice a week when students who have poor grades on homework/tests or quizzes/classwork are given a chance to "redo" the assignment for the opportunity to raise their grade. No longer can a student refuse to complete an assignment, and no longer is an "F" on certain assignments an acceptable grade. In this age of social promotion without any measurable proof that they have achieved the required mastery of the material, redoing is now considered to be a way to preserve student self-esteem and test scores in order for the school to achieve the ever-elusive AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress). The logic is that some students don't get the material the first time that it is taught, and by allowing the student to redo the inadequate work, he or she will sufficiently learn the material in order to master it. That's the logic, anyway.
Here is how this program works. A student, Sally, is an academically poor student. She doesn't do her homework, pays no attention in class, and generally has a "don't care" attitude when it comes to her education. She does not have any learning disabilities. As a result of this behavior of her choice, she is failing Mrs. Smith's math class. Because the school Sally attends has the above-stated policy of allowing students to redo missed or poorly done assignments, Sally is required to attend "Redo Classes" twice weekly, during the school day, in order to redo the inadequate assignments, or the homework that she failed to do as a choice. This policy applies to all students like Sally. When Sally redoes the assignment, she will get, at most, a low "D", or the minimum passing score in the school system in which she resides. While this seems like a good idea on the surface, what are we really teaching Sally and others like her? We are teaching them that initial mediocrity is totally acceptable, and redos will be allowed. This sets what I consider to be a dangerous precedent. When Sally and her ilk get into the "real world," she will think that mediocrity is always going to be acceptable, and she will never choose to "reach for the stars" on the first try. They will think that their boss will always allow them to redo a project that was unacceptably shoddy. Most employers expect their employees' best on the first try. "Redos" are acceptable only if the boss wants changes made that the employee may not have anticipated. The bigger problem is that the liberal education establishment has embraced this idea. Whether it is to preserve the self-esteem of the student, or to make sure the student does well enough to score well on the test that determines AYP, this practice is just wrong. Students need to learn that "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." When a student chooses to not do an assignment or chooses to not do their best on an assignment, they should be judged accordingly. That student has made a choice that they are not going to do the work. They deserve an "F". If the teacher is teaching the subject thoroughly and giving the appropriate type of homework and class assignments, the student should grasp this subject enough in order to pass the test. If the student doesn't understand the assignment, they need to speak up or talk to the teacher after class and request additional assistance, like tutoring. Allowing students to wallow in mediocrity or less is doing a disservice to the student and society as a whole. There is no shame in a student not understanding the material, where the shame lies is with student failing to get help from teachers that want the student to achieve, and allowing the student to redo the assignment until the desired result is achieved. While some teachers may not really care about the students, they do care about their jobs. Teachers that do not make AYP are subject to disciplinary measures that ultimately may affect their jobs. Choices made by the student to not complete homework or class assignments do not indicate any failure on the part of the teacher to teach the material or indicate that the student did not understand the material, but it indicates a failure of motivation on the part of the student to desire to complete the required work.
Some amount of blame should be laid at the feet of parents. When I was growing up and going through school, I was blessed with parents that encouraged me and made sure that I was completing homework assignments as correctly as I could. It didn't mean that I always got "As" or was a straight-A student, it did mean that I was encouraged to have the aforementioned desire to achieve the best I could on the first try. My parents were very invested in my education. They regularly attended Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) meetings, spoke with my teachers, and examined returned papers with frightening regularity. I was punished if I didn't do my best, and my parents made sure if I needed after-school tutoring, they made me go, and they arranged to pick me up. Parents today, in my estimation, don't care about their children's academic achievement. They simply take what their child says at face value, without ever double-checking with the school or teacher. Any amount of educational research that anyone can access on the Internet will tell you that students that have involved parents generally do better in school than those that have parents that are not involved. If the parents are involved--by going over homework, returned papers, teacher wikis and websites, and going to conferences, the student is going to know that the parent cares and is going to be there to help them and be able to know when the student isn't being open and honest. Too many times today, teachers and administrators are confronted with parents angry with them over the failure of their child. They (the parents) blame the school, instead of their lack of involvement. Additionally, teachers and administrators are confronted with angry parents over fair and appropriate disciplinary measures taken by the school because the parents fail to discipline their child at home.
On the flip side of the equation, those that do not have to redo any assignments are required to go to "Enrichment." This period is where those that are responsible students are "allowed" to read, do homework, or (mandatory) enter essay contests. While having time to read what the student wants appears nice on the surface, the student is required to write a summary of what they have read. It is sort of like the old book report--read the book, tell what you read. To me, this sucks the joy out of pleasure reading time, knowing that the student is forced to be accountable for what they choose to read. Also, by mandating students enter essay contests, poster contests, and science fairs, they are potentially turning these students into reluctant participants. Some students don't want to enter essay contests. They don't want to enter poster contests, and they don't want to enter science fairs. By taking away the "academically inclined" student's ability to make choices, the student becomes a resistant student, and dreads the "enrichment" time as much as the student who is required to go to "redo."
If you would like to read more about this idea of "redo time," please click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment