No-Fail Grading Systems?

[SubGod22]

I can't imagine how this could be a good thing... :banghead:

[wsushox1]

It's a terrible Idea. It is putting the idea in the mind of kids that you can never "fail" in life. Thats a bunch of BS, in my opinion. You are gonna fail in life and if kids aren't taught that your gonna fail then they will never put out a 100% effort.

[Indy23]

I'm all for programs that help disadvantaged kids get their high school diploma. It's a worthy cause. But if a kid doesn't put in the effort to pass the class, like every other kid is doing, he or she should fail. If they fail enough, they shouldn't get their diplomas.

Passing basic high school courses is not hard if you go to class (most of the time), listen to your teachers (most of the time), and do your homework (most of the time).

It's simple: If you don't have the aptitude to graduate high school, you shouldn't get a diploma.

I guess the new thing in some schools is banning peer editing in classrooms because of privacy issues. Parents were complaining because other kids could see how stupid their kids are when reviewing their papers.

I remember when peer editing was an invaluable piece of learning how to improve my skills as a writer and an editor.

It's like we're not allowed to tell a kid he's stupid anymore. Trust me, it's something he needs to hear and hear often if he is ever going to do anything to improve it.

[RoyalShock]

It's like we're not allowed to tell a kid he's stupid anymore. Trust me, it's something he needs to hear and hear often if he is ever going to do anything to improve it.

Seriously? He needs to be told repeatedly how stupid he is? Ummm . . . no. Many kids that have gotten poor grades probably already suffer from self-esteem and self-worth issues. Putting them down is only going to make matters worse. That's a prescription for failure for the rest of his life.

Yes, he needs to hear and know about his deficiencies. Being given a grade he didn't earn isn't going to prepare him for life either. But the teacher(s) need to help him design a strategy to address them and offer encouragement.

What the educational system must do is come up with other ways besides written exams to identify a student's aptitude. In my opinion, a mix of written and verbal exams combined with individual and group projects, depending on what is appropriate for a given subject, should be utilized in grading. Giving out no-fail grades or teaching to assesment tests (unintended consequence of No Child Left Behind) is ridiculous.

The first thing that needs to happen is to get the feds out of education completely.

[SubGod22]

The first thing that needs to happen is to get the feds out of education completely.

:good:

[n8]

The first thing that needs to happen is to get the feds out of education completely.

Yes, so prices can escalate and the crushing financial burden of educating America's youth will subjugate the lower and middle classes for generations to come >.<

[wu_shizzle]

The first thing that needs to happen is to get the feds out of education completely.

Yes, so prices can escalate and the crushing financial burden of educating America's youth will subjugate the lower and middle classes for generations to come >.<

Yes, because when government gets involved prices always go down...

[RoyalShock]

The first thing that needs to happen is to get the feds out of education completely.

Yes, so prices can escalate and the crushing financial burden of educating America's youth will subjugate the lower and middle classes for generations to come >.<

How would getting rid of the Dept. of Education cause "prices" to increase? Additionally, please show me in the Constitution where the federal government is authorized to have this power.

[n8]

The first thing that needs to happen is to get the feds out of education completely.

Yes, so prices can escalate and the crushing financial burden of educating America's youth will subjugate the lower and middle classes for generations to come >.<

How would getting rid of the Dept. of Education cause "prices" to increase? Additionally, please show me in the Constitution where the federal government is authorized to have this power.

Eliminating the ED would reduce federal resources to state institutions, causing budget crises nationwide. Given the huge problems Kansas legislators have been having funding its own schools with federal help, I would hate to see what happens without that money.

"Prices" are a relative thing. Public education is still going to be free, but it will have to make cuts or it will become a higher percentage of the overall state budget. College tuition would rise in response to the lost money because the state has to fund elementary and secondary education.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18

[Indy23]

Royal, you're correct that the word 'stupid' probably carried more of a derogatory tone than was my intent. I didn't mean it to come off as negative as it did, and I didn’t intend that statement to extend to all levels and ages of learners.

My point was supposed to be that I’m concerned about the increasing disappearance of criticism in the educational process, because it’s an important part of the development of a person and a student. Schools should not have to be concerned with hurting a kid’s feelings if the student is not putting in the effort to succeed in his or her classes. It has worked that way for generations upon generations. These kids should have to deal with it like everyone else has.

[SB Shock]

Eliminating the ED would reduce federal resources to state institutions, causing budget crises nationwide. Given the huge problems Kansas legislators have been having funding its own schools with federal help, I would hate to see what happens without that money.

You do realize that federal money that is given to Kansas actually come from Kansans?

It works this way, federal government taxes and takes the people money - they then choose how to redistribute that money and how it must be used. Kansas receives ~12% more money from the Federal Government than they pay. But all that money comes with strings attached - if the truth be know it you would find that the way the federal government dictate the use of the money cause huge inefficiencies and waste.

If the Federal Government quit interfering in areas it has no constitutional mandate, then the State of Kansas could make it's own decisions of where it want to spend it tax money.

[SubGod22]

:good:

[n8]

Eliminating the ED would reduce federal resources to state institutions, causing budget crises nationwide. Given the huge problems Kansas legislators have been having funding its own schools with federal help, I would hate to see what happens without that money.

You do realize that federal money that is given to Kansas actually come from Kansans?

It works this way, federal government taxes and takes the people money - they then choose how to redistribute that money and how it must be used. Kansas receives ~12% more money from the Federal Government than they pay. But all that money comes with strings attached - if the truth be know it you would find that the way the federal government dictate the use of the money cause huge inefficiencies and waste.

If the Federal Government quit interfering in areas it has no constitutional mandate, then the State of Kansas could make it's own decisions of where it want to spend it tax money.

You missed the part of my post where I mentioned that the Kansas legislature is completely inept when it comes to appropriating funds for public education. Am I the only one that recalls the court order issued to the legislature to actually fund our schools?

And the "~12%" figure that you posted with no source given is a useless gesture. I don't expect legitimate fact checking on an off topic collegiate sports forum post. However, I do know is that it is important to have a federal education department because it provides opportunities such as Pell Grants to students. If this was left to the states, the amount of dollars available to give grants with would be concentrated in areas such as Illinois, New England, and possibly California. Large population centers. Without a federal institution, those dollars would not be available to students from states such as Mississippi simply because the taxable income is not there.

I cannot say that I'm a fan of initiatives like NCLB that castrate a teacher's ability to be creative in the classroom. Admittedly, having a powerful federal institution runs the risk of placing the states under unworkable restrictions. However, the right kinds of financial arrangements, such as the above, provide some great opportunities.

[RoyalShock]

The DoE is unconstitutional and should be dumped ASAP. I don't care if Kansas gets 12% more than it pays in or not. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

If you think the feds need to run education then petition your congressman for a constitutional amendment.

[SB Shock]

You missed the part of my post where I mentioned that the Kansas legislature is completely inept when it comes to appropriating funds for public education. Am I the only one that recalls the court order issued to the legislature to actually fund our schools?

BTW, that is called being a "legislative court". That is unconstitutional.

And the "~12%" figure that you posted with no source given is a useless gesture.

Fairly easy to find. Here is the study for done from the 1981 to 2005 for all 50 states. Like I was going to really make it up.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

However, I do know is that it is important to have a federal education department because it provides opportunities such as Pell Grants to students. If this was left to the states,

There is the crux of the problem, you don't trust the people (which is the state). You only trust the pencil pusher in Washington to decide what is best. It is the pure liberal mentality that the people are smart enough to decide what is important so lets take their money and we will redistribute it.