Eliminating Honour Rolls in Schools

[cybercoma]

I agree that they should learn, but if we don't recognize and enhance their strengths at a young age, then the possibility of that correcting itself in university is very low.I am not saying the basics should not be taught, but we can't wait for university to allow a child to excel ( or to be recognized as excelling in a certain area) at something they are good at. Students learn one way in grade school, and another way in university. Why can't we combine the two concepts? Why force them on one way of learning during the most important stage in a child's intellectual development, and once ingrained, now tell them they need to learn a different way of learning? That's a dangerous course to follow.Grades matter, and school curriculum matters.

mobile device at the moment, suffice it to say kids would know what they excel at regardless of grades and honour rolls. Focus on grades leads to cramming and other methods for gaining grades, not acquiring knowledge.

[TimG]

Focus on grades leads to cramming and other methods for gaining grades, not acquiring knowledge.

But without objective measures of attainment a large number of kids will slack off and learn nothing. IOW - grades are a flawed measure but they are infinitely better than the alternatives.

[Moonlight Graham]

Ummm...do you understand 21st century skills? Rote memorization 50s style is useless; that includes memorizing times tables and doing long multiplication and division. If I need to multiply large numbers I pull out my smartphone. Why waste time doing boring multiplication?

Students need to be taught multiplication tables. I still use them in everyday situations regularly , and I'm no math whiz. I agree that long multiplication and long division, even long addition and subtraction, can probably go. The last time I used any of those was in high school at the latest. However, I'd still briefly show students these techniques and let them know they exist. Maybe people in more math orientated careers might be better authority to ask if these skills are needed or not later in life.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[carepov]

But without objective measures of attainment a large number of kids will slack off and learn nothing. IOW - grades are a flawed measure but they are infinitely better than the alternatives.

Why the negative expectations? (by the way negative expectations are often self-fulfilling prophesies)

Aren't all human beings naturally curious and instilled with the love of learning - learning for no other reason than for the sake of learning?

At what age do a significant number of kids stop wanting to learn? Stop being curious and creative?

[TimG]

Aren't all human beings naturally curious and instilled with the love of learning - learning for no other reason than for the sake of learning?

Learning is hard work and humans are wired to avoid hard work if it is not deemed necessary. That said, some kids will become obsessive about something but that is more likely to be the latest computer game than a general purpose knowledge that is taught in school.

At what age do a significant number of kids stop wanting to learn? Stop being curious and creative?

Kids never stop wanting to be creative but without school those creative energies are not going to be directed into learning english/history/math. They go into writing fan fiction on net. Edited October 31, 2013 by TimG

[-1=e^ipi]

Ummm...do you understand 21st century skills? Rote memorization 50s style is useless; that includes memorizing times tables and doing long multiplication and division. If I need to multiply large numbers I pull out my smartphone. Why waste time doing boring multiplication?

Lol, smartphone. I will admit that you are a very persistent troll. And you are quite good at portraying the 'progressive educator' archetype that conservatives that criticize 'progressive' learning techniques like to create.

Students need to be taught multiplication tables. I still use them in everyday situations regularly , and I'm no math whiz. I agree that long multiplication and long division, even long addition and subtraction, can probably go.

Sigh, western society and it's anti-math bias.

Teach kids to do basic arithmetic. If there isn't enough time to do this then I suggest that time that is currently being used to indoctrinate them (such as having kids listen to the national anthem every day, or brainwashing them with gaia-worshiping David Suzuki videos) be instead used to teach them the basics.

Being able to do simple arithmetic in your head can be very useful if you are writing a computer program for example (increases speed). Btw, computer programming should be mandatory for all high school diplomas.

The last time I used any of those was in high school at the latest.

This is like the same argument illiterates used to use hundreds of years ago. I don't use reading in every day life, so why bother learning it? Just because you don't use arithmetic or many people in society don't use arithmetic does not mean they arithmetic isn't a useful skill.

Maybe people in more math orientated careers might be better authority to ask if these skills are needed or not later in life.

I have a math oriented career. These skills are useful. Happy?

Aren't all human beings naturally curious and instilled with the love of learning - learning for no other reason than for the sake of learning?

No. I wish it were true but it's not.

Edited October 31, 2013 by -1=e^ipi

[Mighty AC]

If a person doesn't grasp a concept then why are they only getting a 60% instead of an F? Because we don't want to hurt people's feelings?

And if a student is failing, then shouldn't they just retake the class, giving them an opportunity to re-learn what they did not grasp?

If the goal is to actually teach, why not make them work at a concept or a unit until they master it? Why do we let them give up on a topic, only to have to revisit it later? It really doesn't make sense. When the content is fresh the difference between a 60% and an 90% on a concept might be one or two periods of remedial work. If we let students fail and then retake the class, the difference is an entire semester.

[TimG]

If the goal is to actually teach, why not make them work at a concept or a unit until they master it?

Because without deadlines with consequences many kids will simply never get around to it. They will play computer games or hockey or facebook or whatever else has gotten their attention.

[Mighty AC]

But without objective measures of attainment a large number of kids will slack off and learn nothing. IOW - grades are a flawed measure but they are infinitely better than the alternatives.

As it turns out your gut feeling on this doesn't hold up. In short external motivators like grades and test are the worst carrots to dangle in front of students. Better systems and teachers work with students to find internal or intrinsic motivation.

There are many classes already using the student centered, formative approach I've been describing and the results are positive. To make this approach work teachers must spend less time delivering information and more time working directly with students. A stepping stone to a full student centered system is the Flipped Classroom, which was discussed in another education thread created by Socialist.

[Mighty AC]

I frequently participate in education chats and have noticed an amusing trend. People, especially middle aged and older, want increasingly better results from the education system, but invariably demand that education methods should remain static. I suspect it is a view akin to the 'good ole days' myth in which people tend to romanticize the past. Couple that with the myth that all subsequent generations are going to hell in a hand basket and I think we have the root of the resistance problem.

[TimG]

Better systems and teachers work with students to find internal or intrinsic motivation.

Completely meaningless if there is no objective measure of student achievement.

There are many classes already using the student centered, formative approach I've been describing and the results are positive.

The effect of early childhood education looked good at first but as programs were rolled out governments soon found the test study group results were impossible to replicate on a large scale.

That said, you can change teaching styles without eliminating objective measures of student achievement (a.k.a grades and tests).

Edited October 31, 2013 by TimG

[TimG]

I suspect it is a view akin to the 'good ole days' myth in which people tend to romanticize the past. Couple that with the myth that all subsequent generations are going to hell in a hand basket and I think we have the root of the resistance problem.

Of course you discount the fact that older people have a lot more experience with life and a lot better understanding of how the world works. They may discount some naive new ideas because they have seen many come, fail and be forgotten. Edited October 31, 2013 by TimG

[Bonam]

Pretty sure socialist is an alter-ego of Mr.Canada or some such, fairly obvious troll that appeared right when he was banned for a nazi meltdown in the chatroom. Just thought I'd throw that out there for those newer to this forum.

In regards to this topic since some others are discussing it seriously: no, honour rolls should not be removed. Schools recognize the achievements of students in sports, performing arts, community service, etc. Some kids aren't great athletes, aren't great performers, but are great learners. Good old fashioned academic performance should continue to be recognized. We already have a dire shortage of people pursuing fields of academic rigor, and further de-emphasizing academic performance and recognition of said performance during the time in their lives when many kids decide what they will be doing will only further that trend.

In regards to teaching techniques... certainly, providing teaching and assistance to students until they master a concept is a great idea. At the same time, that should not be done at the expense of other students who may have already mastered that concept. Education funding allows for student:teacher ratios on the order of 20-30:1 in public school, so teachers cannot spend all of their time 1 on 1 with students helping them learn (and many teachers are not particularly good at this anyway). Interactive technological tools can help to personalize the learning experience when applied in the correct situations, but at the end of the day, students should still be expected to learn the same material over the course of a year of school.

In regards to testing... it is of prime importance for a variety of reasons. For one, standardized testing allows school boards to determine which schools are doing better than others, which schools may require more resources, etc. Additionally, admittance to universities relying on the results of student grades throughout the year is a good system, to avoid having everything riding on the outcome of one single university entrance exam (which can be vastly more stressful and is a worse gauge of academic performance, since there is far greater variability in the results of a single test rather than an average of many tests over many months).

Furthermore, many students simply don't care about some subjects, or aren't particularly motivated to spend their own time studying. Studying for an exam is a method of forcing people to learn some material, at least some portion of which may be retained as knowledge for the future. In many of my university courses, a good amount of the actual long term learning happened in the few days leading up to tests, where I sat down and went through the notes, textbook, homeworks and problem sets, redid problems I didn't have a clear understanding of, summarized important information for quick review/reference, etc. The reality is that's just where a lot of learning happens. Studying for a test is a lot of hard work, and many students will simply never have the motivation to sit down and do that work unless there is a test coming up.

[dre]

Of course you discount the fact that older people have a lot more experience with life and a lot better understanding of how the world works. They may discount some naive new ideas because they have seen many come, fail and be forgotten.

Hmmmmm... thats certainly not my experience. I find that seniors generally have a very poor understanding of the way the world works today and any experience is stale and mostly not relevant.

[dre]

Pretty sure socialist is an alter-ego of Mr.Canada or some such, fairly obvious troll that appeared right when he was banned for a nazi meltdown in the chatroom. Just thought I'd throw that out there for those newer to this forum.

In regards to this topic since some others are discussing it seriously: no, honour rolls should not be removed. Schools recognize the achievements of students in sports, performing arts, community service, etc. Some kids aren't great athletes, aren't great performers, but are great learners. Good old fashioned academic performance should continue to be recognized. We already have a dire shortage of people pursuing fields of academic rigor, and further de-emphasizing academic performance and recognition of said performance during the time in their lives when many kids decide what they will be doing will only further that trend.

In regards to teaching techniques... certainly, providing teaching and assistance to students until they master a concept is a great idea. At the same time, that should not be done at the expense of other students who may have already mastered that concept. Education funding allows for student:teacher ratios on the order of 20-30:1 in public school, so teachers cannot spend all of their time 1 on 1 with students helping them learn (and many teachers are not particularly good at this anyway). Interactive technological tools can help to personalize the learning experience when applied in the correct situations, but at the end of the day, students should still be expected to learn the same material over the course of a year of school.

In regards to testing... it is of prime importance for a variety of reasons. For one, standardized testing allows school boards to determine which schools are doing better than others, which schools may require more resources, etc. Additionally, admittance to universities relying on the results of student grades throughout the year is a good system, to avoid having everything riding on the outcome of one single university entrance exam (which can be vastly more stressful and is a worse gauge of academic performance, since there is far greater variability in the results of a single test rather than an average of many tests over many months).

Furthermore, many students simply don't care about some subjects, or aren't particularly motivated to spend their own time studying. Studying for an exam is a method of forcing people to learn some material, at least some portion of which may be retained as knowledge for the future. In many of my university courses, a good amount of the actual long term learning happened in the few days leading up to tests, where I sat down and went through the notes, textbook, homeworks and problem sets, redid problems I didn't have a clear understanding of, summarized important information for quick review/reference, etc. The reality is that's just where a lot of learning happens. Studying for a test is a lot of hard work, and many students will simply never have the motivation to sit down and do that work unless there is a test coming up.

I think we should avoid operating in a vacuum, and look at the things that top countries in education do.... a couple of things off the top of my head are....

1. More involvement by the private sector...

2. Earlier branching for students into vocational, polytechnics, and academics.

In Canada our system has a goal of generating as many highly educated people as possible instead of getting the most value out of students overall. If a person shows no aptitute or interest in math and science he should be able to branch into program that will make him a skilled professional (electrician, plumber, automechanic) and those cerfications should be part of the k-12 system.

[Bonam]

I think we should avoid operating in a vacuum, and look at the things that top countries in education do.... a couple of things off the top of my head are....

1. More involvement by the private sector...

2. Earlier branching for students into vocational, polytechnics, and academics.

In Canada our system has a goal of generating as many highly educated people as possible instead of getting the most value out of students overall. If a person shows no aptitute or interest in math and science he should be able to branch into program that will make him a skilled professional (electrician, plumber, automechanic) and those cerfications should be part of the k-12 system.

I certainly agree we should look at what other successful education systems are doing. High school courses in the trades and ways to get into trade-type programs earlier on would certainly be welcome, although, one has to be careful with not incentivizing people to make long term life choices too early before they really know what they want to do. Private sector involvement... sure, I'd be all for it, but you'd have to put up with the cries of people who would protest against the evil corporations corrupting our education system from one that produces "well-rounded members of society" to "well-trained corporate automatons" (the phrasing of someone else I was debating the very same issue with).

[TimG]

Hmmmmm... thats certainly not my experience.

Who is talking about seniors? The original comment was about 'middle age and older' people. Also, 'how the world works' often has more to do with understanding people than understanding technology. A senior might not understand what facebook is but they do understand the social dynamics of bullying which have not really changed. Edited October 31, 2013 by TimG

[bleeding heart]

Ummm...do you understand 21st century skills? Rote memorization 50s style is useless; that includes memorizing times tables and doing long multiplication and division. If I need to multiply large numbers I pull out my smartphone. Why waste time doing boring multiplication?

Because it's good for your brain, to put it in simple, 21st century terms.

[bleeding heart]

Pretty sure socialist is an alter-ego of Mr.Canada or some such, fairly obvious troll that appeared right when he was banned for a nazi meltdown in the chatroom. Just thought I'd throw that out there for those newer to this forum.

I've heard legends of that performance. I'm not especially sorry I missed it though.

In regards to this topic since some others are discussing it seriously: no, honour rolls should not be removed. Schools recognize the achievements of students in sports, performing arts, community service, etc. Some kids aren't great athletes, aren't great performers, but are great learners. Good old fashioned academic performance should continue to be recognized. We already have a dire shortage of people pursuing fields of academic rigor, and further de-emphasizing academic performance and recognition of said performance during the time in their lives when many kids decide what they will be doing will only further that trend.

I think getting rid of honour rolls is counter-productive at worst, useless at best.

I might be getting on in years, but I have zero memory of anyone seeming distressed, left out, or debilitated (if such things are at issue here) by the fact that some students were honoured for their achievements.

[socialist]

Too many people here, besides Mighty AC, have a vague understanding of 21st century education. People don't know what a child-centered classroom looks like, but they still think things need to be the way they used to be. We are living in a different world now.

I came upon this article from the G&M. It amazes and concerns me, by reading the article and the comments that follow, how many people are utterly clueless about education, and in this case, mathematics.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/parenting/why-discovery-based-learning-doesnt-add-up/article14402103/

Discovery based math is much better than the old rote style, useless math. Get educated people.

[carepov]

Aren't all human beings born naturally curious and instilled with the love of learning - learning for no other reason than for the sake of learning?

No. I wish it were true but it's not.

I forgot to include the word "born" into my question.

Don't all todlers ask, what's this, what's that, why, why, why????

Don't all kids in Grades 1-3 love to read, listen to stories, even learn math and science?

IMO a key to sucess in life is a love of learning / curiosity and something is happening to smother out this curiosity. When does this happen, why, and how can we prevent it from happening and instead encourage a love of learning?

[carepov]

Learning is hard work and humans are wired to avoid hard work if it is not deemed necessary.

I strongly disagree from my experience observing 0-6 year-olds. They love "hard work" and if you let them they would "work hard" almost the entire time that they wake up to the time they sleep.

[Mighty AC]

Because without deadlines with consequences many kids will simply never get around to it. They will play computer games or hockey or facebook or whatever else has gotten their attention.

There are still deadlines and evaluations. All of the required concepts for a class must be covered in order to earn the credit. The difference is we don't force the entire class to move at the same pace, which only properly serves a narrow band of students in the middle.

What should be the goal of the education system, actually teaching the concepts deemed important by the curriculum or assigning a number to student performance? If actual learning is the goal then we shouldn't allow students to proceed until a topic has been mastered. With the aid of technology, better teachers spend less time lecturing and more time facilitating individual student needs. There is no actual need for an entire class to work at the same pace anymore.

If we do start teaching curriculum requirements to the point of mastery, grades become irrelevant because everyone now thoroughly understands a completed concept. This opens the door for new and more useful forms of distinction. More advanced or harder working students would then have the opportunity to go beyond the basic class requirements and learn additional topics. Eventually, student portfolios will replace transcripts and will read like a resume. Advanced students will be able to proudly display the fact that they've extended their learning far beyond the basics. And of course, weak to average students will now at least have a solid understanding of the basic concepts; a huge improvement over what occurs today.

[GostHacked]

Too many people here, besides Mighty AC, have a vague understanding of 21st century education. People don't know what a child-centered classroom looks like, but they still think things need to be the way they used to be. We are living in a different world now.

I came upon this article from the G&M. It amazes and concerns me, by reading the article and the comments that follow, how many people are utterly clueless about education, and in this case, mathematics.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/parenting/why-discovery-based-learning-doesnt-add-up/article14402103/

Discovery based math is much better than the old rote style, useless math. Get educated people.

Your own article destroys your argument in the first two paragraphs.

“[The schools] have such a broad concept of what they want to teach without nailing down the fundamentals of arithmetic. They’re trying to create mathematicians, but you can’t do that without teaching arithmetic,” said Gale, who lives in Kitchener, Ont. “Teach them what 14 times 12 is. You have to be able to do that in your head.”

Parents’ frustration with the new approach to math – also known as discovery learning, where students use their own learning styles to explore math problems – has reached a tipping point. Parents who can’t make sense of homework assignments and see their children struggling are spending hundreds of dollars on tutors, logging hours online looking up math tutorials and attending math nights at the local school to understand the new style of teaching. Kumon, a wildly popular after-school math tutoring service that has seen a 23 per cent enrolment increase over three years

They discover that the new methods of teaching math do no work for the benefit of the child. An increase of 23%.... quite significant.

edit ...

Socialist is deliberately calling for the dumbing down of children, claiming it's progressive thinking.

Edited October 31, 2013 by GostHacked

[cybercoma]

Mighty AC has the right idea here, IMO. The focus on grades takes away from a focus on learning. This is why a lot of students eventually view assignments as something you apply yourself to just enough to get by. They no longer take learning itself serious enough, since they're not evaluated on learning. They're evaluated on grades.