At some schools, 4 is the new A+ (exc...

At some schools, 4 is the new A+ (except when it isn't)

There are 48 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Jun 4, 2009, titled At some schools, 4 is the new A+ (except when it isn't). In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

When her children brought home their final report cards on Thursday, Mary Schooley studied the complicated language of their achievement as if she were tackling an algebraic equation.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Reverend Dewey Cox

United States

#44 Jun 5, 2009
Darkwater wrote:
Dumb, Dumb, Dumb Get back to one standard of A through F. Then tell the parents exactly what that means. Geez, The more they try to make each kid feel good about themselves the less they make of the achievements. Every kid is equal, how are they going to experience failure and triumphant? They need both. Idiot teachers and admins both!
Go back even further to E, G, F, and U. Excellent, Good, Fair, and the dreaded, red-ink Unsatisfactory.
Reverend Dewey Cox

United States

#45 Jun 5, 2009
Independent Voter Joliet wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember when they had a check that said needs improvement? there were other choices but you got a grade in one column and a check on the other with it clearly marked what the problem was.. easy and to the point..
Wow, you ARE old! That's how they graded me in elementary school. All 11 years of it.

Joliet, IL

#46 Jun 5, 2009
Gobblygook wrote:
One of the key motivations to the nonsense of alpha and numeric 'grading' is that it helps make quantification of acadmeic results more difficult.
You can't evaluate - on any meaningful basis, that which is unquantifiable.
These institutions mights as well drop the alpha-numerics altogether and simply send home report-cards that provide a single number - reflecting the number of days the student was present. After all, since the number of kids on the number of days that show up determines funding, that's all that really matters - right? It doesn't matter that we're turning out generation after generation of unemployables. No, it's only about getting their hands on those tax-dollars.
Learning - real learning {instead of preparing for standardized/lowest common denominator tests that are used as a basis for funding from the public trough}, that ceased to be the goal of public education in these parts a long long time ago.
A definate way to make sure no child is left behind.

Joliet, IL

#47 Jun 5, 2009
bob1stshirt wrote:
<quoted text>
Give me a break. A, B, C, D, & F are PERFECTLY acceptable ways of determining whether a child is learning what's expected of them! All this other **** is just a smoke and mirrors method of covering up what's really going on. If a parent can't decipher the report card, then it doesn't matter what you call it.
We've gone so far down this "self-esteem" road that we're now producing young adults who can't balance a checkbook and think that life owes them a big house, new car, and a 60" plasma TV.
"You're special," works just fine until the day when an employer expects you to actually DO something. The professional educators and the schools that teach them have been "tinkering" with methods of education since the late '60s. At one point in time, my grade school tore down the walls and there was nothing but air to separate one class from another. This "Open" design was supposed to liberate a child's mind. It was supposed to stimulate them to think of new ideas. Instead, the kids and teachers were distracted by the noise from other "classrooms," and the kids began chatting with kids in other classrooms.
How 'bout less innovation and more concentration on 'readin', writin' and 'rithmatic?
And, if Chicago's now using these amended grading scales... how's that workin' FOR THE KIDS? I could care less if it makes the teacher's job any easier.
Exactly. I was one who suffered from their stupid experiment back then with the "new math" My kids had the stupid "writing to read", forget phonics and spelling. And a calculator for 1st grade math. I too wish they'd quit experimenting, because it's obvious it's not working very well. Outside of the computer, they have dumbed down these kids horribly.

Joliet, IL

#49 Jun 5, 2009
S means Satisfactory wrote:
I grew up in the 70s in Ohio (outside of Cleveland), my district used the E-S-N-U system for the primary grades. It's nothing new and nothing to get in a twitter about - it works well for the younger crowd because they're learning the basics, not competing against each other. Competition is healthy, but in its proper place. Crushing little self-esteems that early is not the right method. My daughter's school uses a similar system from kindergarten through 2nd, and the A-B-C system starts in 3rd. It's really not a big deal to expand it to include older students.
Change happens - we have to adapt to become a more global culture. All of you "Who Moved My Cheese" moaners need to realize that we really aren't the big fish in the lake any more, and the U.S. lags behind in its educational methods.
Ya we used to be the leaders, something the rest of the world strived to be like. Now we're at the bottom of pack. You'd think that's enough of a wake-up call to see this "new" stuff isn't working very well.

United States

#50 Jun 5, 2009
Better parents would make better students.

Bolingbrook, IL

#51 Jun 5, 2009
Smell_The_Coffee wrote:
Better parents would make better students.
You are totally correct, sir/ma'am. We've been throwing money at the public education system - especially in large urban areas - for over three decades and grades/graduation rates/etc. have only declined.

We could double the pay for teachers and it would all be for naught if parents won't spend more time and effort to teach their children.

Chicago, IL

#52 Jun 17, 2009
How it used to be in Elementary School!(GRADES K-5):
1 = good
2 = satisfactory
3 = poor

E = excellent
I = improving
S = satisfactory
N = needs improvement

Now, we only get letter grades!:
A (Any type of A, from a + to a -)= 100%- 93%
B (Any type of B, from a + to a -)= 92%- 84%
C (Any type of B, from a + to a -)= 83%- 75%
D (Any type of D, from a + to a -)=
75%- 65%
F (Any type of F, from a + to a -)= 65%- 0.

I think that the reason why children in K-5 grades get numbers because they may be able to comprehend what the numbers mean to tell what grade they got to make it easier for them to understand. Also, I think NUMBER grades ARE THE SAME as LETTER grades because they mean the same thing:

1 (OR AN A)= good
2/(OR AN B)= satisfactory
3/(OR AN C)= poor

E/(OR AN A)= excellent
I/(OR AN B)= improving
S/(OR AN C)= satisfactory
N/(OR AN D)/(OR AN F)= needs improvement

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Vernon Hills Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News $3.5 Million Bond In Deadly Waukegan Gang Shooting (Jun '08) 7 hr When will it stop 42
News AP Exclusive: Union members appointed after $10... (Mar '08) Mon WTK 7,581
Just Another Reason Why We Need To Rid The Coun... (Jul '10) Jan 10 italianmoon 8
News Murder suspect waives bail hearing (Aug '07) Jan 9 Depooty 264
durham school bus service (Oct '09) Jan 9 FarmTan90 20
George boyd Smith Jan 8 Mary 1
News Effort to thaw pipe starts fire in Gurnee Jan 5 Informed resident 1

Vernon Hills Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Vernon Hills Mortgages