As a lesson, no-zero policy misses mark
Had Ross Sheppard High School physics teacher Lynden Dorval been subject to the school’s situational codes, he would have received a mark of CNA. The acronym stands for “chose not to attempt,” and it adequately sums up his actions, though certainly not in the way officials from Edmonton Public Schools would suggest.
Dorval chose not to perpetuate the notion that the threat of consequences for refusing to complete assignments and take tests will do more harm than good to students. For committing repeated breaches of Ross Shep’s assessment policy — he was old-school enough to hand out zeros for work not done — Dorval has been suspended indefinitely.
Dorval will fight the suspension, as is his right. But the facts are pretty clear-cut. He consciously broke school policy; his suspension therefore seems hard to argue with. But the policy has to change. And when it does, Dorval should be able to take credit and his rightful place in the classroom.
Quality education demands a system of measurement. Given the circumstances Dorval described — repeated warnings to students about missed work and offers to accommodate re-dos — a mark of zero more than adequately reflects a student’s willingness to participate in learning.
But at Ross Sheppard and other junior high and high schools in Edmonton, a mark of zero is no longer allowed. Zero hasn’t been an allowable score at Shep for about 18 months, since administrators adopted a system of so-called situational codes like CNA and embraced a theory espoused by educational consultants that a failing score adversely affects the student and the learning process.
At Ross Sheppard, NC (not completed) is the new zero. But so is NHI (not handed in). In fact, zero has been replaced by 11 letter codes, including OMI (omitted at teacher’s discretion), CNA (chose not to attempt), LDI (learned and demonstrated informally) and our favourite, SKIP, which needs no explanation.
The letter codes are supposed to enlighten students (and hopefully parents) to their situation regarding a given assignment or test. That’s fine, if the student acts on the advice of teachers and parents and completes the assignment or takes the test prior to the end of the semester or school year. But there is no obvious end point for a student who never complies.
For Dorval, the suspension is something of an end point to his rebellion.
Zero is also quite final, and contrary to the theories of some educational consultants, it seems a motivating one given the “flood of assignments” Dorval said he receives after showing students what that mark will do to their overall grades.
Of course, the consultants have an opinion on teachers like Dorval, too. They describe them as one of the “challenges standing in the way of improving assessment and grading practices in our schools,” according to a February 2009 consultants’ report, Redefining Fair, which Edmonton Public Schools posted on its website this week in response to the uproar over Dorval’s suspension.
Challenge 3 states: “Teachers cling to outdated beliefs about motivation, discipline, responsibility and fairness that lead to inappropriate assessment and grading practices.”
The three consultants who wrote the report — Damian Cooper, Ken O’Connor and Nanci Wakeman — have redefined all four qualities as they apply to the “norm-referenced system” of assessment they eschew and the “criterion-referenced system” they advocate. Their main contention is that the former system demands uniformity while the latter offers equity of opportunity.
“This means that the number and design of the assessments for a given subject or course may need to vary to enable all students to achieve success.”
The idea seems to be that if you move the target enough, everyone will hit it. But what of the student who doesn’t even take a shot? How can he or she be allowed to ignore the concept of grades-for-work? Wouldn’t that be like allowing a teacher to break school policy without any consequences?
Ross Sheppard’s situational codes suggest that particular school has bought much of what the consultants were selling. And Edmonton Public Schools Superintendent Edgar Schmidt argues the mark of zero lets students off the hook, so he accepts their theories as well.
He said the district policy of having teachers chasing down students to complete assignments leads to more accomplishment. He’s probably right. But the student who fails to respond to all those well-meaning and time-consuming attempts by educators, and probably by parents as well, must eventually face some consequence greater than a new set of letters.
Bring back the zero. Consider it a life lesson for our future doctors, lawyers and yes, teachers, for rare is the boss who will pay an employee to do nothing.