[wildrosegirl]

And these "new tactics" are implemented for one reason and one reason only:

To improve how Canadian students appear to perform on the worldwide education scale. Rather than "crack the whip" on our dear, delicate children so they can compete on the worldwide scale with countries like China and Japan (who crack their whips relentlessly), we alter our system so it doesn't look like we suck near as badly as we do when the results are published.

I've been on enough committees over the years that this crap just makes me sick.

[Lemmy]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

An inability to manage your time and complete projects in the real world results in unemployment. The education system is failing the kids yet again, in preparing them for the real world and real world expectations.

What if being given that second chance saved the kid? Maybe, had the kid gotten a second chance he would have passed the class and graduated highschool instead of finishing grade 12 one credit short. Maybe instead of then going to work at Subway the kid went to college and learned to weld or run computers or repair arteries.

I'm not buying the "We're teaching them a lesson of the real world" argument. What you're doing is telling them that learning and education is oppressive. When a guy comes to work for you, you tell him "This isn't highschool, kid. If you're late in your work, you're fired". That's a lesson that can be learned that day. It's not a lesson that a 14 year-old will get anyway.

[Mustang1]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Mustang1 Mustang1:

No...that's still not correct. ALL secondary courses are broken down into specific evaluative "buckets". Often the split is 70% course and a combination of culminating activity and examination that equals 30%. That's it. No expectation is "credit jeopardizing", especially in a scenario like you stated - if a student did 9 out 10 course-based assignments, then that mark would stand (minus the incomplete assignment). Period. A further grade would follow on a culminating and exam that would equal 30%. Their credit, depending upon their follow up evaluations would determine their overall mark. In fact, a student can bomb an exam or U level essay (which would likely be a course weight anyway) and still get a credit.

Sorry and respectfully, but you're wrong. There certainly are outcomes which are "essential" and must be demonstated to pass. Now, in practice, a lot of that theory is skirted by classroom teachers, but I'm absolutely certain about what I'm talking about regarding outcomes and strands. I also know lots of teachers who are entering 35% for kids that fail to meet certain key elements of the course.

A kid CAN bomb an assignment and pass. But according to the Ministry documents, they shouldn't.

Sorry, and respectfully, but nothing i've posted is actually incorrect. Mark breakdown, according to the The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 9 to 12, Program Planning and Assessment allocates a 70/30 split. If a student failed an essay in the course component, they don't automatically fail.

What outcomes must be demonstrated formally in order to pass? Specific curriculum outcomes? There's dozens of curriculum expectations but that's not assessment categories - those are different. A grade that was below 50% meant that a student didn't meet the total criteria outlined in the course profile - a teacher can't withhold a credit if a student gets 90% on course, 50% on culminating and 50% on Exam, but he/she bombed an essay.

[Lemmy]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

If a student failed an essay in the course component, they don't automatically fail.

I didn't say they did. I said that if they failed a course OUTCOME, not a specific assignmenmt. Any assignment would likely have many outcomes evaluated.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

What outcomes must be demonstrated formally in order to pass? Specific curriculum outcomes? There's dozens of curriculum expectations but that's not assessment categories - those are different.

Yes, I think one of us was talking about course outlines and the other was talking about Ministry strands.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

A grade that was below 50% meant that a student didn't meet the total criteria outlined in the course profile - a teacher can't withhold a credit if a student gets 90% on course, 50% on culminating and 50% on Exam, but he/she bombed an essay.

Oh yes she can. All that needs to happen is for the teacher to include a phrase on the first-day handout that says "the Independent Research esay is an essential assignment and must be succesfully completed to earn credit". It happens all the time.

[ShepherdsDog]

This policy is not for the student who misses only one assignment. This is to cover the habitual slacker. In the real world you are not usually canned for being late, if you have a valid excuse. But if it is habitual, you get to join the unemployment stats and rightly so. It is disrespectful to both the teachers and the students(most) who do meet the deadlines.

[Mustang1]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I didn't say they did. I said that if they failed a course OUTCOME, not a specific assignmenmt. Any assignment would likely have many outcomes evaluated.

Failing to meet a course outcome wouldn't lose a credit either.

$1:

Oh yes she can. All that needs to happen is for the teacher to include a phrase on the first-day handout that says "the Independent Research esay is an essential assignment and must be succesfully completed to earn credit". It happens all the time.

Can't do it - it violates the Reporting on Achievement of Curriculum Expectations found in the "The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 9 to 12: Program Planning and Assessment."

As stated earlier, the final grade is only determined after 70% of the evaluations are based on course grades throughout the course, and the remaining 30% left to performance tasks, culminating activities and examinations. That's it, the 70/30 breakdown has no "essential assignments" that must be passed in order for credit attainment (especially considering the fact that it is expected that the student receive numerous and varied opportunities to demonstrate course expectations).

That's the Ministry document.

[Lemmy]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Failing to meet a course outcome wouldn't lose a credit either.

Depends on the course and the outcome, but generally failing to achieve one single outcome would not be credit jeopardizing...but it could be. I'm trying to think of an example. It would likely have to be something very general, like failing to "demonstrate safe use of shop tools" in a Construction Technology course.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Can't do it - it violates the Reporting on Achievement of Curriculum Expectations found in the "The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 9 to 12: Program Planning and Assessment."

As stated earlier, the final grade is only determined after 70% of the evaluations are based on course grades throughout the course, and the remaining 30% left to performance tasks, culminating activities and examinations. That's it, the 70/30 breakdown has no "essential assignments" that must be passed in order for credit attainment (especially considering the fact that it is expected that the student receive numerous and varied opportunities to demonstrate course expectations).

That's the Ministry document.

Now we're back to the confusion between curriculum documents, Ministry documents and actual practise. Ministry documents, like Progam Planning and Assesment, are essentially approved ways for classroom teachers to skirt the scholarly but often impractical reality of the curriculum. In practise, teachers are failing students for failing to complete essays and other culminating activities. In a lot of Boards, these kids are then put into "Credit recovery", where they get the opportunity to complete or improve the bombed assignment and earn the credit after the conclusion of the course (They get an arbitrary grade of 50%, in the Upper Grand Board). This is a form of the "varied opportunities to demonstrate" approach you speak of.

[Mustang1]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Depends on the course and the outcome, but generally failing to achieve one single outcome would not be credit jeopardizing...but it could be. I'm trying to think of an example. It would likely have to be something very general, like failing to "demonstrate safe use of shop tools" in a Construction Technology course.

I'm not being argumentative, but i can't think of where 1 missed curriculum expectation would result in a lost credit.

$1:

Now we're back to the confusion between curriculum documents, Ministry documents and actual practise. Ministry documents, like Progam Planning and Assesment, are essentially approved ways for classroom teachers to skirt the scholarly but often impractical reality of the curriculum. In practise, teachers are failing students for failing to complete essays and other culminating activities. In a lot of Boards, these kids are then put into "Credit recovery", where they get the opportunity to complete or improve the bombed assignment and earn the credit after the conclusion of the course (They get an arbitrary grade of 50%, in the Upper Grand Board). This is a form of the "varied opportunities to demonstrate" approach you speak of.

Actual practice, if it violates the Ministry documents, would be incorrect.
A teacher simply can't, "include a phrase on the first-day handout that says "the Independent Research esay is an essential assignment and must be successfully completed to earn credit". That's all i was saying.

If teachers are "failing students for failing to complete essays and other culminating activities" solely on that criteria than they're in the wrong and they've violated Ministry standards. It's quite clear on reporting of student achievement.

Furthermore, if a student is in "credit recovery" is isn't solely because they failed an essay (there's no such designation). That might be a component of the recovery, but the only legitimate way they failed to obtain the original credit is that they earned less than 50% in the course with 70/30 breakdown. If, mathematically speaking, the essay was a prime reason, then that might be indicated, but you can't fail a course only because you bombed a paper.

[Lemmy]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

I'm not being argumentative, but i can't think of where 1 missed curriculum expectation would result in a lost credit.

Neither can I. But could a significant number be missed in a single assignment, or over several assignments, even if the student's mathematical grade is greater than 50%?

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Actual practice, if it violates the Ministry documents, would be incorrect.
A teacher simply can't, "include a phrase on the first-day handout that says "the Independent Research esay is an essential assignment and must be successfully completed to earn credit". That's all i was saying.

But they do. It happens all the time.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

If teachers are "failing students for failing to complete essays and other culminating activities" solely on that criteria than they're in the wrong and they've violated Ministry standards. It's quite clear on reporting of student achievement.

And again, Ministry documents often contradict the curriculum. What happens is the curriculum comes out. The teachers say "We can't do this" and the Minsitry makes documents to assist the teachers.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Furthermore, if a student is in "credit recovery" is isn't solely because they failed an essay (there's no such designation). That might be a component of the recovery, but the only legitimate way they failed to obtain the original credit is that they earned less than 50% in the course with 70/30 breakdown. If, mathematically speaking, the essay was a prime reason, then that might be indicated, but you can't fail a course only because you bombed a paper.

Well, sorry, but you can. It's happening in many Boards in Ontario right now. Most of the kids in credit recovery in the Upper Grand Board are there to complete one assignment to earn the improvement from 35% to 50%. That's a fact.

[Mustang1]

Lemmy Lemmy:

But they do. It happens all the time.

And they're still wrong.

$1:

And again, Ministry documents often contradict the curriculum. What happens is the curriculum comes out. The teachers say "We can't do this" and the Minsitry makes documents to assist the teachers.

Really? Teachers often violate the 70/30 split and create "credit jeopardizing" assignments with make it or break it expectations? Some might, and they're wrong. Curriculum expectations are vastly different than achievement reporting. I've been consistently referencing the latter. I'd be really surprised that any administrator worth his/her reputation would knowingly allow achievement reporting to be altered.

$1:

Well, sorry, but you can. It's happening in many Boards in Ontario right now. Most of the kids in credit recovery in the Upper Grand Board are there to complete one assignment to earn the improvement from 35% to 50%. That's a fact.

If that's happening...and students are only going to credit recovery (which, as i understand it, is only for early secondary years) solely based on arbitrary failing of a "credit jeopardizing" assignment then, again, the Reporting Student Achievement section of the THE ONTARIO CURRICULUM, GRADES 9 TO 12: PROGRAM PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT has been circumvented or ignored.

Most teachers, boards and administrators follow the Assessment documents - especially the 70/30 - and stuff like "the Independent Research esay is an essential assignment and must be successfully completed to earn credit" isn't the exception.

[Lemmy]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Really? Teachers often violate the 70/30 split and create "credit jeopardizing" assignments with make it or break it expectations? Some might, and they're wrong. Curriculum expectations are vastly different than achievement reporting. I've been consistently referencing the latter. I'd be really surprised that any administrator worth his/her reputation would knowingly allow achievement reporting to be altered.

Even the 70/30 thing is very loosely interpreted. A teacher can have a final exam that counts as 2% and call his her last 4 assignments "culminating activities", effectively making course work 98% and exam 2%.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

If that's happening...and students are only going to credit recovery solely based on arbitrary failing of a "credit jeopardizing" assignment then, again, the Reporting Student Achievement section of the THE ONTARIO CURRICULUM, GRADES 9 TO 12: PROGRAM PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT has been circumvented or ignored.

Not if the teacher is able to support that the particular assignment is essential to demonstrating the outcome strands of the course. In the case of 4U courses, an essay is such an assignment, in practise, for virtually every grade 12 university-streamed student in Ontario.

I presmume you meant "is the exception", but it's not. It's common practise throughout the province. It's too prevelent to be "rogue" teachers ignoring the Ministry documents. It goes on everywhere.

[Mustang1]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Even the 70/30 thing is very loosely interpreted. A teacher can have a final exam that counts as 2% and call his her last 4 assignments "culminating activities", effectively making course work 98% and exam 2%.

70/30 isn't "loosely interpreted". Its specifically outlined in THE ONTARIO CURRICULUM, GRADES 9 TO 12: PROGRAM PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT. You can't have 98% Course and 2% Exam.

"A final grade is recorded for every course, and a credit is granted and recorded for every
course in which the student’s grade is 50% or higher. The final grade for each course in
Grades 9–12 will be determined as follows:
• Seventy per cent of the grade will be based on evaluations conducted throughout the course.
This portion of the grade should reflect the student’s most consistent level of achievement
throughout the course, although special consideration should be given to more recent
evidence of achievement.
• Thirty per cent of the grade will be based on a final evaluation in the form of an examination,
performance, essay, and/or other method of evaluation suitable to the course content
and administered towards the end of the course."

If the teacher did what you suggested, he/she doesn't understand a major component of their profession.

$1:

Not if the teacher is able to support that the particular assignment is essential to demonstrating the outcome strands of the course. In the case of 4U courses, an essay is such an assignment, in practise, for virtually every grade 12 university-streamed student in Ontario.

Sorry, but then, they're wrong. It's that simple. A student can fail an essay, even in 4U, and still pass the course.

$1:

I presmume you meant "is the exception", but it's not. It's common practise throughout the province. It's too prevelent to be "rogue" teachers ignoring the Ministry documents. It goes on everywhere.

It isn't common practice throughout the province for educators, administrators and stake-holders to circumvent basic student achievement reporting. I'll grant you some teachers don't meet all curriculum expectations, but MOST do not, simply make up assessment criteria and ignore basic 70/30 breakdowns.

[westmanguy]

Yep, welcome to the education system in Manitoba. Glad to be out of it in 6 months.

[Lemmy]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

70/30 isn't "loosely interpreted". Its specifically outlined in THE ONTARIO CURRICULUM, GRADES 9 TO 12: PROGRAM PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT. You can't have 98% Course and 2% Exam.

"A final grade is recorded for every course, and a credit is granted and recorded for every
course in which the student’s grade is 50% or higher. The final grade for each course in
Grades 9–12 will be determined as follows:
• Seventy per cent of the grade will be based on evaluations conducted throughout the course.
This portion of the grade should reflect the student’s most consistent level of achievement
throughout the course, although special consideration should be given to more recent
evidence of achievement.
• Thirty per cent of the grade will be based on a final evaluation in the form of an examination,
performance, essay, and/or other method of evaluation suitable to the course content
and administered towards the end of the course."

If the teacher did what you suggested, he/she doesn't understand a major component of their profession.

IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. There are lots of courses that don't even have final exams or anything resembling a culminating activity. Most phys-ed courses are prefect examples.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Sorry, but then, they're wrong. It's that simple. A student can fail an essay, even in 4U, and still pass the course.

Sure they can. They can also fail for not doing it. It depends on the course, the teacher and the assignment.

Mustang1 Mustang1:

It isn't common practice throughout the province for educators, administrators and stake-holders to circumvent basic student achievement reporting. I'll grant you some teachers don't meet all curriculum expectations, but MOST do not, simply make up assessment criteria and ignore basic 70/30 breakdowns.

Well, we may be missing some important, pertinent Ministry document, but I'm sorry, you're patently wrong if you believe that 70/30 is a hard-fast rule in practice, and likewise, that students can't fail courses on the basis of "credit jeopardizing assesments" being omitted.

[Yogi]

The store that I do most of my subcontract work for has taken on a local high school student for 'work experience'. The young fellow is in GrXI. He works 5 afternoons per week, and gets paid min wage for hours worked. The time spent, and performance is graded much the same as any course within the school confines. This program also counts towards his total credits for the year. For Mon-Fri he is scheduled to work with a different installer each day, and Friday is spent in the store. Whenever he is late, and the installer has left the shop, the young fellows 'book' is marked as 'absent', and he is sent home, and not paid. At the bottom of each page is a space for 'employer comment'. This is filled out appropriately, to reflect his performance. His performance thus far has been 'poor enough' that his mommy has come into the store imploring the owner not to be so harsh, that "it seems like you want my son to fail and be kicked out of the program! It was politely, but firmly explained to 'Mommy' that " Junior's future is completely in his own hands.. he must show up on time and work diligently"!