Averaging and Zeroes

http://www.teachertube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=dbd43d54b1307129474f

This is a clip of Dr. Douglas Reeves speaking to a Canadian audience about what he calls "toxic" grading practices. Reeves is the author of more than 25 books and countless articles on education.

In the clip Reeves talks about zeroes and averaging. We showed this clip to our high school faculty and there were wide ranging responses:

• Students deserve the average because this helps differentiate the steady performing student from the student that does poorly all the time but well at the end.
• Students are a sum of all of their performances so the average is the correct score for them.
• Zeroes are an essential part of grading.
• I want students to see zeroes and I want them to be calculated in the grade.

Here I want to clarify and expand upon some of what Dr. Reeves was getting at. First in the case of the average.

While in the clip he states provocatively that all averaging must go, what he and other researchers have been preaching for the past decade is to end a mindless devotion to the average as the only way of evaluating students. In fact the average might be the right score for a given student. I, along with Reeves and other researchers, am arguing that the average is not the best evaluation for all students.

It comes back as always to a conversation about standards. Is our goal to get them to the standard (in our parlance competency)? If we work hard as teachers and students work hard at learning and understanding and they make it to the standard what should the grade represent? Why should it be the average in this case? If everyone can meet the standard at the end but then we average scores it not only hurts students but it hurts us. The scores are a poor representation of how we operated as teachers. Grading is always a subjective process. As professionals we strive to minimize the subjectivity but we cannot eliminate it. As professionally trained practitioners we should allow ourselves to award students the score, the evaluation, that most appropriately matches their ability.

As far as zeroes I have posted on this many times but take one more example.

• 100-40=A
• 39-30=B
• 29-20=C
• 19-10=D
• 9-0=F

When you present this example people say that is ridiculous! But this system is as mathematically unsound as the system where the top four categories are 10 or 11 points and the last category is 59 points. So this is the first argument against zeroes--it is simply mathematically unsound.

The second argument is that it does not increase motivation. And has been shown by Dr. Reeves to have a role in whether struggling students stay in school or leave. Zeroes motivate only one type of student--good ones, ones like teachers used to be when they were in the classroom. The students that we worry about the most are not motivated to do work by receiving a zero. To the contrary they are encouraged to give up because when zeros mount the combination of their extra mathematical weight and the increase in a feeling of hopelessness cause students to shut down.

I feel strongly that zeroes should not be used and the average should not be used in all cases. That said, if a teacher still wants to use zeroes and averages as the only way to go I would ask them to continue that practice only after reflecting on exactly why they want to do it that way. As professionals we will always evaluate in different ways--the question is: Is the way you reach the evaluation of a student the best representation of what they can do?