Mediocre students make the “good effort” honor list

Plus 4.0 has been pumped.

Which follows, if you think about all this.



I don't know what happened to all of those people. I declined re my 50 reunion. I was somewhat interested in the whole group of them and would enjoy hearing life stories but....
I'd been semi stalked by one person, the one person I least wanted to ever hear from again, who had gotten a lead to me from the second least person I ever wanted to hear from, about a year before., and chased my number all the way to abq. Well, I don't blame the second person so much, and am not so hostile to her, but the first one hangs on like gum.

I tried to be both kind and straightforward.

Love a duck.

Count me in those who think you need to memorize those tables. Math education is moving the way you suggest with much less emphasis on repetitive problem solving and much more on understanding "what multiplication means". The downside of that is when you are working on large, real life problems those who know the multiplication tables don't waste time on the mechanics and focus on the theory while those who don't get bogged down in pulling out their calculators. When I'm working with engineers of my generation or older, we routinely do basic math to a couple of significant digits in our heads while working out problems. I just watch the younger engineers struggle with the basic math. It's not that they don't know how to do it, just that they can't do it as second nature and it becomes a stumbling block. I remember one extrememly bright engineer who had to pause the discussion to open a spreadsheet to do a very basic math problem. I was stunned.

If you are very competent in multiplication, it makes it easier to focus on the fundamentals of algebra. If you are very competent in algebra, it makes it easier to focus on learning trig and calculus. It's hard to build up a solid math learning structure without a strong foundation. While not everyone needs this approach, I disagree that the exceptions disprove the rule.

That may occasionally be true, but the majority of engineers I know got very good grades in math and science primarily because of that natural love and aptitude in mathematics and science. My experience is that those with that aptitude blow through those rote math problems even though they don't find them particularly challenging. I would hope that there is value to those without particularly strong math skills in solving a tough problem about two trains leaving cities at different times, even if it is only the reward of a tough challenge overcome. Will you ever have to do that in real life? Of course not, no more often than you will be called upon to solve a real life jigsaw puzzle. I do believe that those who can see the logic in that train system would be more likely to see the logic in more complex systems and be better candidates for harder classes. You'd be hard pressed to show that those with C's in math in high school will perform equally to those with A's in a science or engineering curriculum although I'm sure individual examples abound. Grades aren't a perfect predictor of future performance, but I think the correlation is pretty decent, whether the student got the grade due to hard work or talent.

This makes me sad and just a little angry. When my kid took Chemistry the first time (studied really hard, got a D) we went back over the test questions and his answers to find out WHY he either 1)didn't know the answer or 2)put down an incorrect one. Turns out he was studying for Chemistry in the same way he studied for a History exam and was a little stunned by the teacher's "fill in the blank'' of the calculation questions.
(In History's multiple choice, you know one of the answers has to be the right one.)
Once he had the concept of how to reach the answer, he flew.

(BTW: he now operates a water treatment plant, chemical calculations every hour, in Texas.)

I helped run homework seminars for poor kids in Texas. The kids didn't like memorizing lists of historical names and dates. Names and dates are important, but they are only the framework of history.
We started a "Tell the Soap Opera" session. One kid would read out loud a section of the History text. Each other kid (we had about 20) would have to get up and retell a part of the story in their own words. (Battle of Bunker Hill, Inventions of the Early 1800's, whatever.) and then say "Then what?" and the next kid would start there.
It was permissible to shout out corrections.
It was really fun AND each one ended up being able to tell a summarized story of (i.e.)the Missouri Compromise in about a minute. (Improved their English too!)
Not picking on you, K, but somebody has to do more than feel bad, they have to find the way each kid's brain works.

Joe(So there was this guy, Sam Houston, .... .)Nation

This is an interesting question (that two engineers are speculating about with no data whatsoever).

It would be interesting to see real data on this, wouldn't it? I suspect there would not be a very strong correlation between high school grades and engineering success (especially when accounting for the correlation between grades and parents income and success and parents income).

How about, instead of putting a C student, as comparing to the student body as a whole, a system is put in place where a student could be recognized for doing the best in that catagory?

You could have "C with distinction" even "D with distinction".

Without comparing to the A students, you're recognizing that a D is the best work this person could do, and s/he worked damned hard for it.

Then, when that student that got a D in a particular subject, or all their subjects went to look for work, the potential employer could see what sort of effort was put out.

I think I might want someone who got all "C 's with dintinction" over someone who got all A's, but did so without challenging himself, and just slid by.

That would be interesting, but the data set would also be skewed since in the existing system, low grades would probably eliminate you from consideration at a top flight school.

There's a lot of posts here about students who go on to medical school, law school, etc.

But most people do not end up walking around with jobs with a title like Dr., or Esq.

If I had a business with a lot of job opening for people with "average", "normal", "top of the bell curve" skills, I don't perhaps need "A" material, as they might not do a good job.

I really don't want any old "C" person either. I might be getting people who, with effort, were worthy of a B or an A, but were lazy.

I might need a B or an A person, but if I saw someone with a "C with distinction" I would carefully consider, and perhaps hire them.

Of what value is an A in a dance theory course, if you lack talent for dance?

To some extent engineer.... and getting into a "good" school is one reason for kids to obsess over grades. On the other hand, what percentage of kids can possibly go to these "top flight" schools when they are 18.

A very bright friend of mine did his undergraduate degree at University of Massachusetts (a State University with fairly low entrance requirements). He then entered M.I.T (a private University with very high entrance requirement) for his graduate degree. I don't know, but I suspect that his high school grades were not great.

I am not saying that grades aren't important to some extent. I am saying that the obsession with grades is counterproductive with many kids, and that in most cases the importance of grades for having success (however you define it) is greatly overrated. (Obviously the small percentage of kids who want to go to Ivy league schools are a counterexample).

Of what value is an A if you are an exceptional dancer?

I agree that there is a weird obsession with grades going on these days. It's not good enough to take an "honors" class because the "AP" class is worth more towards your GPA. I think an average student who works towards an A in a class of average difficulty is to be praised as much as a gifted student who works towards an A in an honors class. What I don't agree with is praising students, honors or otherwise who get C's. C is passing and that's great. Your reward is your diploma. If you want extra recognition for grades, you have to step it up some. Maybe grades aren't your thing and you will get recognition in some other area of your life where you are more passionate. Maybe you excel in sports or dance or art or music, that is where you put your time and energy, and that is where you will get your meaningful recognition. But for those who put their time and effort into acedemics, I don't have a problem recognizing their accomplishments both with earned good grades and with honor roles. I doubt that anyone really is motivated by the chance to get on the honor role. It is more of a recognition of work well done, much like a sports trophy or an ovation. I don't like the concept of a "good effort" honor role for the same reason that I don't like standing ovations at mediocre performances and trophies for everyone at sporting events. "When everyone is special, no one is."

I kinda agree with on this. The only thing I don't like is the curve thing where you do a percentage gets A, B, C, etc. My issue with it is you could potentially have more than 5% students that are incredible and deserve the A in one class and the opposite result in another. So you because you have a class of "dummies" you need to award one with an A to meet a quota when most deserve a D for instance.

I do agree that the standards should be higher, where in theory a small amount get As and so forth - more the work should be more difficult. My kids' school have a slightly different grading system than what I've seen typical in other schools - you have to get a 94 average or higher in order to an "A"; 84 - 93 is a "B", etc. This boosts up the expections at each grade level.

Not necessarily - each child learns differently and each child is motivated differently. Some need the extra prodding and testing, etc. And I disagree that a 5 year old learns verb tenses correctly on their own. There are many adults that do not. Most 5 year olds say incorrect verb tenses actually. How many times do you hear little kids say things like I runned to the store.

'
That's actually a sign that they're learning verb tenses, though.

It's developmentally correct for a young child to say things like "runned" instead of "ran." It shows that they've learned the general rule, but they have not yet learned the exceptions to the general rule.

Yes I agree - it is one of those "every wins" philosphy. Which works a bit at very young ages, but at some point a child needs to learn they aren't all that in everything. If you always "make the paper" even if you are performing at an OK level, the child is led to believe he is doing well. Then is shocked when he doesn't get into the best college - it gives them a false sense of praise.

Actually I am all for some sort of recognition of "great effort". I think my concern is this is not really going be truly for some one that has made a great effort, but something where the average student is given praise for showing up to school and doing average work.

The sound of having a good effort list in itself that is published in the paper - makes it seem like it will be a string of kids rather than the handful that really did give good effort. Also, what is to say that the ones that made the honor also gave above average effort - do they then show up on both?

I think a honor roll best effort lists demeans the thought of best effort. Wouldn't such an honor be best shown to one or two kids in the class - maybe in an award ceremony? By having a list, it really isn't the kids who shown best effort then if you are on there with the other 50 others that made a best effort.

I think you hit it - it is valuing meritocracy.

I read something recently about "the Harvard solution". This could be apocryphal, but I found the story interesting.

Harvard started running into a problem. They only accepted outstanding students, and these students were used to getting outstanding grades. Then when they were graded on a curve against other outstanding students, they got mad that they were no longer receiving all A's.

Harvard's solution to this was to start offering scholarships to folks who otherwise wouldn't have been able to gain admittance. Thus, the scholarship kids were happy just to be there, and the other kids were happy because they were still making A's.

That they are learning - yes - but not that they know the correct usage and exceptions, etc. Thus why you learn grammar in school.