[QHdy5Z3A]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/09...rd-graduation/

A low-performing Manhattan high school that was granted up to $6 million in extra funds to undergo a “transformation” has found the secret formula for success: Dumb down the requirements for students to pass.

At Washington Irving HS, near Union Square, administrators have approved new grading policies that give failing kids credits toward graduation.
Under the rules:

* Students who get failing scores of 50 to 55 in class will “automatically” get 15 points for a passing 65 to 70 grade if they pass a Regents exam. Kids who score a minimum 65 on the Regents “should receive a passing grade” in the class. The same practice forced a Bronx principal to resign.

* A final grade of 60 to 64 “will be changed automatically” to a passing 65.

* Students who fail a class “will be assigned ... a work product not to exceed five pages” or “alternative project.” Livid teachers say pupils who cut class or blew off studying get a “packet” of work or take an online multiple-choice “credit recovery” program.

“The message is loud and clear: Don’t worry if you don’t attend school -- we’ll just give you an easy way to make up the credit,” a staffer said. “What does that say to the kids who actually do the class work, tests, projects and homework?”

People wonder why the US is falling behind the rest of the world academically...so is this the moral for our children and grandchildren? "It's okay if you don't try or do your best, we'll just give everything to you in a handout..."

So why even have teachers at that school? What a shame...

[Dndjzirw]

I grew up in NY (granted that was over 20 years ago) and I can tell you just passing the Regents exam is no easy feat. If a kid barely goes to class and blows off the work, they will probably not score a 65 on the test. They are pretty tough and you really can't teach the test. Some things like math you can, because you teach the same concepts, but others the person has to really have their crap together. If they don't do the work and pass the test, they cheated or they are too smart to go to class. I went to a school that was very far above average and there were plenty of kids who went to class and still failed the Regents. All were required to go to summer school. The Regents is a test, written by the state, where every kid in the state has to take it at exactly the same time. It cuts down on cheating, but there are always scandals of leaded test material.

The thing about the grading is somewhat common, though not a blatant policy. The thing is, if you fail the Regents, you go to summer school where all you have to do is pass the test anyway. No grades in summer school, you pass the test you pass the class. But seriously, if we have all this standardized testing, what is the point of grades anyway? Isn't the point just to pass the test? If you pass the test, do you have to go back and relearn the information the test says you already know (because you had a 50 grade)? No standardized testing is perfect, but I've always said the NY Regents was better because you had to do it in all subjects, not just reading and math. I remember sweating a French regents as a senior.

But, it is accurate. If you get below a 65, they give you an F. The teacher does not have to post the actual grade until the end of the class. Most will make it a 64 unless you totally screw off. But it doesn't matter anyway. If you have a 100 average throughout the class and fail the Regents, good luck in summer school. That part I do like. Takes some of the subjectivity from the teachers who push kids through school. They have to pass the test.

[objennasweene]

I grew up in NY (granted that was over 20 years ago) and I can tell you just passing the Regents exam is no easy feat. If a kid barely goes to class and blows off the work, they will probably not score a 65 on the test. They are pretty tough and you really can't teach the test. Some things like math you can, because you teach the same concepts, but others the person has to really have their crap together. If they don't do the work and pass the test, they cheated or they are too smart to go to class. I went to a school that was very far above average and there were plenty of kids who went to class and still failed the Regents. All were required to go to summer school. The Regents is a test, written by the state, where every kid in the state has to take it at exactly the same time. It cuts down on cheating, but there are always scandals of leaded test material.

The thing about the grading is somewhat common, though not a blatant policy. The thing is, if you fail the Regents, you go to summer school where all you have to do is pass the test anyway. No grades in summer school, you pass the test you pass the class. But seriously, if we have all this standardized testing, what is the point of grades anyway? Isn't the point just to pass the test? If you pass the test, do you have to go back and relearn the information the test says you already know (because you had a 50 grade)? No standardized testing is perfect, but I've always said the NY Regents was better because you had to do it in all subjects, not just reading and math. I remember sweating a French regents as a senior.

But, it is accurate. If you get below a 65, they give you an F. The teacher does not have to post the actual grade until the end of the class. Most will make it a 64 unless you totally screw off. But it doesn't matter anyway. If you have a 100 average throughout the class and fail the Regents, good luck in summer school. That part I do like. Takes some of the subjectivity from the teachers who push kids through school. They have to pass the test.

But then what actually gets a kid to try if they know they can just take this test? I think sometimes testing is overrated anyway because most people will just study for a test and then data dump the information after it's over. A lot of people don't retain what they learn unless they apply it every day.

Here's what I don't get are these last two:

A final grade of 60 to 64 “will be changed automatically” to a passing 65.

* Students who fail a class “will be assigned ... a work product not to exceed five pages” or “alternative project.” Livid teachers say pupils who cut class or blew off studying get a “packet” of work or take an online multiple-choice “credit recovery” program.


It's almost akin to giving everyone a "participation trophy" even if they didn't win a competition. So basically it says on here if they end up with a 64 they get a 65. Then that last one that if they fail they get some type of what seems to be "extra credit." In my view, if you can't take the time to show up to class and make something of yourself, get an education, then that's your problem, no one else's. It's just like the stupid automatic promotions or the waivers for PT test in NCOES schools. If you aren't going to work hard, then why should someone give you something...

[HondasMenFox]

if SECED (secretary duncan) hears of this, am sure he'll adopt this methodology for all skools - reading, writing and arthimetic are a bygone teaching approach - now, all kids pass, present or not...educators and administration eliteist have long lost teaching children - DODEA is the very worst I've seen in 21 YOS

no child left behind is another fiasco - WAKE up AMERICA