Conventional Wisdom

Yesterday I attended a gifted ed training session in which we read a highly biased article about why teachers need to do away with giving students zeros, and how, if they do, their students, parents and schools will be much more productive and happy.

Ah yes, the sublime world where everyone learns together in harmony. Every child nods yes and no, they all understand directions, no matter how complicated, and parents praise their child's teacher through gifts of chocolate and candy.

Although I have been lavished with gifts by my students' parents, I know that no such world exists.

There is an inescapable reality. People are messy, filled with flaws, and of varying degrees of intelligence. Some people love structure, and others hate it. Some people think in a linear and orderly fashion (me), whereas other's thoughts bounce around and lead to other ideas much like dribbled paint in a Jackson Pollack painting. And I, the gifted teacher, will teach to all styles and learning methods. At least it is my job to attempt such a feat.

So, therefore, why give zeros? Zeros ignore each child's learning style and to give them such a punitive grade is hardly the mechanism for productive learning.

Except, many argue, there is a harsh reality out there. The reality is that life isn't so accepting of faults and flaws, according to many seasoned teachers. In real life, many teachers posit, if you are late for a job, you are fired. If you don't do your work, you are fired, and there is no paycheck. As evidence to support this idea, one teacher in the class stated that military contractors have no tolerance for delays. If the work isn't done, then you are gone. Another coworker of mine, who once worked for a telesales company, said that those who are incompetent are fired. If someone doesn't show up to McDonald's for work, then no job.

But there is another reality out there that many who are in favor of punitive grading do not realize exists. There is the white collar world in which executives often arrive late, and everyone quietly moans to himself, but says nothing. There is the world in which an editor can make mistakes, miss a deadline, and while they could be reprimanded, they are often not fired for one mistake. I have personally witnessed the most incompetent professionals make multitudes of mistakes, and they are still employed. It is maddening to watch them stay on, but this is a reality for many.

So as to whether or not giving zeros is a reflection of reality lies within the personal experiences of the grader/parent/student. From what I can tell, zeros are appropriate from the eyes of those who live in a harsher, more punitive world. For those of us who come from a more white collar, professional world where tardiness is not the anathema to a productive world, grades do not have to be quite so harsh.

Personally, I do not give zeros. Why? Because they are still kids. I don't feel it's my job to crush them when they are young. Yes, they have to learn a consequence, and I will give a failing grade for that assignment, but I won't give a 0 and ruin their chances for having even a C as a final grade.

In the article, the author stated that zeros were mathematically incorrect. How could that be? Well, if you think about it, an 80 is a C. That's the median (thinking of a bell curve). An A+, or 100, would be on the far right of the curve, i.e., the maximum. In terms of standard deviations from the median, the minimum would not be a 0. It would be 60. So therefore, mathematically, 0s are statistically incorrect. If we are going to use grades on such a scale, then an E (or F) would be a 60. To make 0 statistically significant, then a C would be 50 and an A+ would still be 100. Only then would the 0 work, mathematically speaking. So for me, I give 60s, not zeros.

I know, it's crazy! It makes no sense (but it does). But then again, our world is a little crazy, and we are all a little off. Why expect our kids to be exceptions to the rule?