Real Talk
Grade reform has become a highly debated topic. Several large districts, including urban districts in Nevada, California, and Oregon, have adopted new practices, such as “no zero” policies. These districts decided to implement these policies to address grading equity issues and lower the likelihood that students will fail. However, there is an ongoing debate on the effectiveness of these grading policy changes. Many teachers strongly believe that these policies force them to give students grades they have not earned, undermining their autonomy to instruct students to the best of their ability.
In an effort to increase graduation rates and decrease failure rates, we are teaching students life skills that are actually doing more harm than good. Many educators, including myself, firmly believe that by setting high expectations, students are more likely to rise to the occasion. Lowering the bar will only lead to greater failure in school and life.
What is a “No Zero” policy?
One of the biggest reforms to support the advancement of struggling students is the “No Zero” policy. When a school or district adopts a “No Zero” policy, it means that students cannot receive a grade of zero for missing or incomplete assignments. Instead, they may receive a minimum grade of 50% or be given opportunities to make up the work. The rationale for this is that if students get zeroes, they will stop trying because they will be too far behind to pass.
While this policy may seem like a compassionate approach to supporting struggling students who might otherwise fail their classes, it can be detrimental for the following reasons:
1. Students learn how to game the system.
Students know exactly what they need to do to pass the class with a D. If the goal is to increase learning, this isn’t helping. Students tune out, skip class, talk in class, and do basically nothing most of the time. Downtime is not good… not good, at all. Even students in advanced courses know when they have locked in an A and do not have to study for a final test. Time is wasted, and learning stops dead in its tracks.
2. Intrinsic motivation is lost on young students.
While intrinsic motivation is important, it is often an insufficient motivator for young adolescents. Students always ask, “Is this for a grade?” and immediately tune out when there is no extrinsic reward. They are intrinsically motivated by likes on social media and not by complex algebraic equations.
3. Failure is an important part of development.
Here’s the thing: failure is a crucial part of the learning process. When we prevent kids from experiencing it, we are impeding their social and emotional growth. Students need to learn that there are very real consequences that come from sitting in class and doing, I don’t know… NOTHING!!
4. Life skills are diminished.
If the school aims to teach students how to be successful in college and their jobs, students need to get what they earn. Hard work, effort, and problem-solving are rewarded, and laziness is not. Grade inflation can lead to a false sense of entitlement, hindering the development of perseverance to achieve goals.
When failure is not an option
First off, there is a common fallacy and opinion in society that teachers are the ones who fail students. Quite the opposite is true. Teachers are doing everything they can to keep students motivated by teaching effectively. Students are the ones who have the responsibility to put forth effort and earn points toward a passing grade.
Moreover, when we place the sole burden of responsibility on teachers for students’ academic and behavioral performance, we’re setting everyone up for failure.
When parents and administrators chastise us for giving students the failing grades the students have earned, it ties our hands and teaches kids to develop an external locus of control instead of an internal one. While there’s value in allowing multiple retakes of tests and assignments, students don’t even try the first time, knowing they will receive many chances.
Once again, the teachers have to work extra hours to create retakes of assessments and schedule after-hours opportunities to make up work. This again adds to the false assumption that we are responsible for the grades students receive while piling on extra teacher duties that lead to teacher burnout.
Alternative solutions
If we are worried that students will tune out once they receive a poor score on a summative assessment, we should allow their lowest test scores to be dropped as they do in college. This will encourage students to study for future exams, knowing their lowest grade can be dropped.
Another alternative solution could be to implement a system of formative assessments, where teachers regularly assess students’ understanding of the material and provide feedback to help them improve. This approach emphasizes the importance of ongoing feedback and continuous improvement rather than relying on a single summative grade.
Time and time again, we have taken teachers out of the equation for solving education-related problems. Our opinions on grading reform, standardized testing, and curriculum bear no weight, when we (the teachers) are the ones doing the heavy lifting. Implementing blanket policies that most teachers disagree with drives a further divide and lack of trust between educators and policymakers. When will we work together for the common good?
