|
|
|
Causes - factors that impact grades - "the rest of the story" |
Degree of control from the child's perspective |
|
Textbook used - some may be better than others |
Little |
|
Time -- amount of time spent on the material being tested |
Little |
|
Expectations of the teacher, school, community and parents on the importance of education and the child's ability to learn |
Little |
|
Homework -- number of homework assignments given |
Little |
|
Teacher -- skills, knowledge, and abilities |
Little |
|
Questions. The number of questions and the point value assigned to each question that will be used to determine the grade |
Little |
|
Parental Involvement -- Do parent (s) take an interest in their child's performance? Do they attend parent/teacher conferences? |
Little |
|
Money -- Amount of tax dollars spent per child |
Little |
|
Homework -- Complete assignments on time; ask questions, seek additional help |
Direct |
Given the examples listed above, is assigning a grade to a child who has little control over most of the factors that contribute to determining the grade, effective and fair? In addition to the child, should grades also be assigned to the parents, teachers, school and the government?
Some Destructive Effects of Grades
In the late 1980's, I had the opportunity to attend a four-day seminar
conducted by quality expert Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Deming talked about
the destructive effects that grades in school (and employee performance
appraisals in the workforce) can have on individuals and organizations.
His point was that the majority of problems in any system or process are due to
factors beyond one individual's control. Consequently, it was more important for
everyone to work together to continually improve the system. The issue of eliminating grades in school took me the
longest to comprehend and it helps to understand the difference between common and special causes
of variation.
I occasionally teach at the college level and when I am required to assign
grades, I assign either "A's", "F's" or "I's" for
incompletes. My process requires students to show-up and do the work until
they get it right. It's rare that a student has to re-do the work more
than twice. The "F's" are assigned to students that either don't show up
and/or refuse to do the work. Incompletes are given to students that could not complete assignments due to
factors such as illness, job-related travel or family emergencies.
Hypothetically, if 100 different teachers taught the same class to the same groups of students, grades for each individual could vary from A's to F's. Some students who received an F could have learned more from that respective teacher than from the teacher that gave them an A. This variation in grades is one reason why colleges rely on standardized tests in admissions. In effect, grades are like a lottery -- students having little control over the factors that determine the final outcome.
Below is an excerpt from my book Success Through Quality, Support Guide for the Journey to Continuous Improvement (chapter 4, page 54) which illustrates one of my first applications of the quality technology as it related to education.
|
When
he was in elementary school, my older son started bringing
home math tests and quizzes with poor grades (D’s and F’s). D’s and F’s
indicate that he missed many questions. I
asked him if he thought the problem was due to a common cause or a special
cause. In other words, I wanted to
know if all the other kids were having problems, i.e., common causes resulting
from a stable process, or it was just him.
He concluded that, since all of the other kids also did poorly on the
tests and quizzes for that class, the results were common.
I then analyzed where he was having difficulty and was able to help him
to change his process, which eliminated the problem.
I also talked with the teacher, who confirmed that the problem was
common. |
In my son's case, the destructive consequences of the "grade paradigm" in elementary school occurred when he received low grades and concluded that "he was not good at math." The school and teachers concluded that "ability groups" would be used for the students "that were not good at math." Whatever name is used for these "ability groups," the kids know them as consisting of the smart kids and the not-so smart kids. This labeling creates both high and low expectations that are adopted by the students as well as the teachers. When my son scored well in math on a high school placement test, his elementary teacher still recommended that he be placed in one of the lower ability groups -- advice that was soundly rejected. He went on to graduate with honors from both high school and college that included receiving "A's" and "B's" in math courses that consisted of calculus, geometry and trigonometry.
In one of the courses that my son took in college, a tenured professor on the first day of the class told the students that more than 50% of them would flunk the course. The professor was able to meet this expectation. Students as well as college advisors refer to these types of courses as "weed-out" courses which are not considered unusual. From the quality perspective, this situation indicates a stable system that the process owners (college/professor) consider acceptable. This example is also the equivalent of an employee of an organization telling their customers in advance that half of them will be dissatisfied with the service and would not be getting their money back. Who should be receiving the "failing grades" in these examples? I did write a letter to the university who acknowledged my letter but not the issue of the "weed-out" courses.
A grade is more a reflection on the overall process than on the student. The focus should be on continually improving the process! I have worked with elementary school teachers that have applied the quality technology to improve the teaching of math within their classrooms. Their efforts have been so successful (students mastering the material, helping each other to improve their processes, and increasing test scores), that the teachers in the school voted to apply the process school-wide. Most impressive to me were the success stories of students that went from "F's" to "A's" and then established new goals to improve their speed in solving problems. This from students who truly believed that "they were just not good at math."
Given the current grade paradigm, the immediate application of the quality technology as it relates to education, is to de-emphasize grades, set high expectations, focus on and continually improve the process and support students to ask questions and seek additional help if they do not understand the material being presented -- factors that parents and students can control.
If a school system adopted the quality technology, they could easily maximize scores on standardized tests -- starting with math, by continually improving their system and processes. They would also start to develop more of the unlimited potential of students as well as teachers.
For more information on improving the education system, see the Criteria for Performance Excellence - Education at: http://www.quality.nist.gov. To learn more about process improvement, see Koalaty Kid at http://www.indyasq.org or the Koalaty Kid web site at: http://www.koalatykid.org.
To learn more about a tool that will help you develop more of a system's perspective, see "Getting the Most from a Cause and Effect Diagram."
