"Honors" Students

06/26/2011

12 Comments

 
I decided to use traditional grading methods for my online Physical Geology summer class, seeing as I had already created enough grading pandemonium using standards-based scoring during the school year.

If there was still a teeny-tiny part of me not convinced to get rid of points and letter grades, it has been eradicated after this experience.

The class started with 12 brave students (this is the first time my high school has offered online summer classes).  The purpose behind developing the class?  To offer summer courses that were accelerated in order to challenge our "high-achieving" students.

Of those 12 "high-achieving" students, I have 4 left.  There are two weeks left in the class.

Where did those 8 students go?  They dropped. Too much work, they said.  They rankled against doing blog posts where I asked them to be creative and make up stories about plate tectonics; they bristled at my online quizzes (written to demonstrate higher-order thinking) where, as one of them put it, "How am I supposed to answer questions I can't look up the answers to?"  They expressed grave concerns about the state of their GPAs.

But what appalled me the most were these comments made by a parent of a student that dropped this week:

"I understand that the class began with 12 enrolled and there are now 5.  This does not bode well of a class of 'honors students' that I know. What specifically would <the student> need to do to get an A in the class?  This is the only grade that <the student> will accept to continue with the class."

This parent also stated that the student was not "accustomed" to redoing work (I allow students to redo all blog posts for reassessment).

All I could think of was what Alfie Kohn said in his article, "The Costs of Overemphasizing Achievement:"

"Specifically, research indicates that the use of traditional letter or number grades is reliably associated with three consequences. First, students tend to lose interest in whatever they’re learning. As motivation to get good grades goes up, motivation to explore ideas tends to go down. Second, students try to avoid challenging tasks whenever possible. More difficult assignments, after all, would be seen as an impediment to getting a top grade. Finally, the quality of students’ thinking is less impressive. One study after another shows that creativity and even long-term recall of facts are adversely affected by the use of traditional grades."

I used to scoff at Alfie Kohn, his ideas, and his rhetoric.  But, after my experiences with "high-achieving" students this year, I am a fervent convert.  Every characteristic that Alfie Kohn described above I have experienced in these four short weeks of summer school.

Amen, Alfie.  Amen. 

So here are some questions I have:

1) What's really meant by the term "honors student?"  What do "honors" programs really teach students to do?
2) How do we transform these "honors students'" fixed mindsets into growth mindsets?
3) How do we restore the creativity in these "honors students" that has been subdued and neglected since grade school as a result of a factory-model system of education?
4) How long will turning them back into learners (i.e., deprogramming) take, and can it be done after they enter high school?

But the biggest question I have is this:

How can we redesign schools so we prevent turning students into "honors students" in the first place?

 


Comments

Aaron Eyler link
06/27/2011 05:09

This is a common problem during the school year, and your post just shows how demonstrative it can be when applied to a setting that is not compulsory. I teach AP US History and Honors US I, and every year I start with 20 more students than I have after the first week. Why? I boil this down to the "cogs in the machine" approach that most have to education. In many situations, students get high marks for clapping out erasers, bringing in apples, or simply sitting there and being quiet. We need more people (like you) to throw down the gauntlet, and work with kids to expect more from themselves. They needn't be complacent with simply performing rote tasks, but like everything else in life, if they know there is somewhere they can go where that's all that will be asked of them then they'll take that exit.

You're doing a great job pushing kids.

P.S. Don't worry about that one parent's comment regarding "only accepting the A". They exist everywhere.

AE

Reply
Terie
06/27/2011 07:47

Aaron:

Thanks for your kind words, and thanks for the comment. My admins were concerned when so many students left, and I had to remind them of the mindset of the students with which we were dealing. I think it's wrong that, when many students drop a class, it is automatically assumed that the teacher is asking too much of the students.

And I agree with your "cogs in the machine" analysis--too often students have gotten points and good grades by getting rewarded for things that have nothing to do with learning. Marzano calls this "grade contamination," and I think this has been one of my biggest fights this year, especially when I tell students and parents that effort doesn't get factored in to the final grade.

And I agree with the use of the word "complacent;" our system creates compliant students that are satisfied with "just enough," and want the highest recognition for it--because we've given it to them, and because it's hard work when you expect more out of students, for them and for the teacher.

Reply
Tina Hopper
06/27/2011 09:33

I've never taught before, but what you are trying to achieve here has a great deal of merit.

When I read blog posts such as this one, the lack of desire for students to think creatively gets under my skin a great deal; it seems that both parents and children are being short-sighted in the benefits of thinking creatively.

I work for a global technology company in an escalation role, troubleshooting customer issues with video endpoints. I also assist in the new hire process for my particular team; after interviewing over 20 individuals for one open position, we have yet to discover any potential hire who has the desire to think creatively and learn/think "beyond the fix," to use a Kepner-Tregoe term. Have we settled for the best candidate out of those 20? Absolutely not. We refuse to hire candidates that cannot and will not learn outside of the instruction manual; our company has a stellar reputation for customer support and our team will not accept less.

Additionally, our company is a big believer in Kepner-Tregoe (KT); we hold KT classes often for all employees. Even with heavy emphasis on KT, we have some individuals on front-line support who cannot think beyond the following thought process:

"Customer is reporting <symptom>. I cannot find a known issue. Let me know how to fix this."

Internally, I read such requests as:

"This situation does not fit with anything in any guide, manual, documentation, or anything else I know - I am unwilling to think any further ergo the escalation team can do my thinking for me."

There is a fine line between assisting someone, helping them to expand their mental skills, and doing their work. Needless to say, quite often we have no mercy on such requests, and the escalation teir has the right to refuse them. We push back and ask questions, attempting to enable the engineer to think creatively and put the pieces together (with assistance). I am always surprised when we are met with resistance and attitude when they are challenged with thinking creatively about a complex issue.

What makes these situations more infuriating: I am dealing with adults. I've often thought, why is this so difficult, where is this resistance to creative thought coming from? And it dawned on me...has anyone ever taught these individuals how to think creatively?

The simple answer is that it appears they don't want to think creatively; easier to learn rote memorization of facts than to stretch their minds. That is unfortunate. One is not graded in my line of work for how well you follow the instruction guide, especially when it's the customer that's "grading" you on your performance.

Case in point: my team often works with technology either a) we have often never seen before or b) behaving in a manner that doesn't fit any known behavior. Because I have been taught (by experience, some of which was painful) to think through the issue (and inside, outside, around and beyond the problem), I am confident in my ability to solve any issue thrown my way.

I don't see this quality very often these days, especially in potential new hires. I see a lot of experience in memorization of facts but the lack of ability to apply those facts to real-world situations.

Reply
Leslie Healey/Healigan link
06/27/2011 10:12

Many of my students and parents believe that the A grade is a forgone conclusion once they enroll in a class. Parents accept behavior from their children that I would not accept from strangers, and expect me to do the same. So it is an uphill battle to introduce new styles of learning to juniors and seniors in high school. First quarter with Honors BritLit or World Lit with Healigan(me) is usually tough, for they are confronted with new methods, different essential questions, etc. I know there are students don’t take my class because I expect them to spend time outside of class. I am impressed by how young they have learned to game the system, but it is too bad. I am known as a "hard" teacher because when forced to test, I assign in class essays with a choice of prompts. They even complain about choosing their own topic! I promote the difference between "hard" and "hard work" whenever possible, and the work eventually gets authentic. By 4th quarter, my seniors assess their own blogs, so I get more creative work out of them that way. I am still confounded, though, by the concomitant futility of grades and the reluctance to participate in learning when I do not assign grades or points. And this year I am teaching AP Lit, teaching to a test. Talk about cognitive dissonance for me!

Reply
Emily VA
06/27/2011 13:40

I'm having the opposite experience from you -- teaching a pass/fail remedial summer school class and using it to try out SBG, and loving that I can, "you'll work more on this and try again" whenever a kid panics at not knowing something.

Reply
Terie
06/27/2011 13:48

I think (and I could be wrong) whether you have an easy time/hard time using SBG or pushing kids to think is how much prior experience they've had, and what the "learning values" are of the community. I know I do have some students that love the opportunities to redo work and try again, but, in our community, those are few and far between. The definition of "learning" that has been promoted in our community from K-8 is "the more stuff you can memorize, the smarter you are, and if you struggle, the problem is with the teacher." There's an attitude (that comes with Dweck's fixed mindset) that if it's hard, for these students, it's not worth the risk to their grades and fragile GPAs. The focus is all wrong.

Reply
gasstationwithoutpumps link
06/28/2011 08:42

Caveat: you are seeing the drop rate as an indication that the students are only interested in As. It could be that the students are not learning what they had hoped to learn, and are reacting to that rather than to grades. I know that if I signed up for a science class (Physical Geology) and was spending my time making up stories about plate tectonics, I'd drop also.

Reply
Terie
06/28/2011 10:13

I have e-mails from these students telling me it's because they can't get an A that they dropped.

And I am sorry you would drop the class if you were asked to do something creative like write a story; I believe that assignments like that show how well students are connecting and creating their own meaning. Reading assignments like that can tell me more about a students' understanding and ability to make connections between concepts than any listing of disconnected facts or multiple choice test ever can.

Reply
Tracie link
06/28/2011 19:23

This is such a frustrating position to be in. We talk and talk about "rigor" and challenging kids, but when we do activities in our classrooms that might actually meet those definitions, we end up having to explain ourselves.

It seems to me that calling something honors simply means the kids do more work. Not necessarily better work, just more.

We have spent so much time beating the creativity out of our kids that I'm not sure we can beat it back in. I think getting rid of those crow-eaten standardized tests would be a good start. Funny how everyone seems to agree with that, but no one can make it happen.

I love what you are doing, keep up the great work!

Oh, and I do assignments like your plate tectonics story as well. Memorizing a textbook doesn't show me that you understand an idea, but writing and explaining from a new perspective certainly does.

Reply
Sandy
06/29/2011 12:18

I enjoy your blog because it's obvious that you're smart and dedicated and really care about student learning, and that you question authority, which I love.

But I detect some hubris here. It seems to me that you're not allowing for the possibility that *you might be wrong* this summer! Eight out of twelve?! Isn't it possible that your idea of tasks that demonstrate deeper understanding, or higher level thinking, might sometimes just be a different *type* of hoops for students to jump through for a good grade?

It seems like you're getting into murky territory here, where your requirements might seem more meaningful to you because they reflect your own biases, and in fact might not actually be any more valid or encourage deeper learning any more than than traditional assignments and assessments.

Reply
Terie
06/29/2011 12:45

Believe me, when things like this happen, the first thing I ask myself is, "What am I doing wrong?" And then I make corrections and adjust, which I have done during this course.

And you might be right--I might be asking them to jump through different hoops for a good grade. I have asked myself that question many, many times over the course of this school year. However, I believe (and I know this community very well, having taught here 10 years) that these hoops, different as they may be, are causing this much grief because I am shaking these students out of educational stagnation.

And you're not the first person to tell me that what I do and say reflects my own biases; I recognize that in myself. But I don't think that makes me any different from any other teacher out there, trying to do what he/she feels is right for their students. I admit wholeheartedly that I am biased towards what research and best-practice says will promote deep understanding. And, as such, I carry out and promote my bias towards student learning daily, unashamedly.

Maybe I am wrong. If so, I would be more than happy to hear any suggestions over the right "hoops" I need my students' to jump through. I am more than capable of admitting my "hoops" were wrong and fixing my mistakes.

But what if I'm right?

Reply
Sandy
07/02/2011 10:48

Thank you for your gracious response. When I reread my post, I see that I came across a bit more critical than I meant to. I'm enjoying this topic very much.

Here’s what I think about higher order thinking, if indeed there even is such a "thing" that exists discretely, in a defined, measurable way, rather than merely as an eduspeak construct: Its development surely depends upon a complex, not-fully-understood set of factors, many of which are not under the student's direct control, especially during the time span of a single semester.

An inborn talent (or lack of it) for synthesizing and making connections is one of those contributing, as surely as Tiger Woods had the potential to become a master golfer while Shaquille O’Neal did not, and vice versa. Not everyone can think at higher levels; to pretend otherwise is a disrespect to the varying talents in any group of students.

To that inequality at the starting gate, then, add the factor of timing. Students who do have the potential for the type of thinking you’re looking for will come to your classroom at various stages of the long process of developing this potential, a process that includes the ongoing maturing of mind and of temperament, the exposure to many, many facts and ideas, and the experience of making mistakes and being willing to learn from them. To expect evidence of this process to be accrued and displayed on demand during the length of one school year, let alone a short summer course, and to believe that your assessments, however well designed, can provide an accurate snapshot of this incredibly complex development -- well, I think it's going to set some (many) kids up for frustration and possible failure.

I'm not sure what I'm advocating, exactly. Maybe there's a way to introduce kids to higher level thinking and what it looks like, and to take satisfaction in knowing that you are contributing to their development by doing that, but to uncouple that process from grading? Because it makes me terribly uncomfortable to assign grades (high-stakes grades, for students with ambitious college plans) based on a highly individualized development process that is largely invisible, develops in fits and starts, and may not be under the student’s own control.

I would love to read some of the research you refer to, regarding proven practices that "promote deep understanding," if you have time to post some links or study titles and authors. So far, I have not seen research that convinces me it is even *possible to teach* higher order thinking.

For now, then, I’m sticking with my conviction that the best we can do, as teachers, is to help kids to properly rig their boats and set their sails to try to catch the wind, if you will, of mature thought. When and whence will come that wind is a mystery to all of us, teachers and students alike. Until then, I’m going to be assessing their rigging and knots, not the billowing of their sails.

Thanks again for your thoughtful reply and this forum for discussion. :)

Reply

Comments are closed.