To: Liv Finne. Washington Policy Center #2
5.1.20
Liv: I hope this message finds you well and thriving in these stressful times.
1] While you included the “key exchange”, as you put it, one has to listen to most of a 25 minute recording to hear the “entire exchange” on the new “grading issue”. I suspect SPI Reykdal had more to say on the issue than your “key exchange” contained. I would like to see the transcript, if you have access to such information.
2] We should make a distinction between that which is being done to address the multiple issues surrounding the “Covid-19 Spring Semester” and that which is being discussed for long term change.
3] I’m not wild about the “A”/”Incomplete” protocol, as it leaves open to question the actual level of achievement. But, I’m not going to stress much about it, as the cause is well known and the necessity both severe and temporary.
4] I find it odd, even to the point of amusement, that John Carlson, the quintessential champion of individual freedoms and “liberty” , would chastise a state official for not coming out against a locally decided policy. Seems as though those individual freedoms pale, when they contain concepts with which Carlson disagrees. But, that’s a discussion for another day.
5] If SPI Reykdal is serious about the likelihood of a “Proficient”/ “Not Proficient” grading protocol becoming the standard in the future, I suspect you & I are going to be in opposition to such a proposal. In my humble opinion, there are more appropriate ways to address the need for “social justice” in American Education than diluting the differentiations in achievement. Also, having taught Freshman Honors Civics and Comparative Cultures, I agree that some students’ level of achievement will move well beyond the ordinary and they deserve credit for those achievements.
6] There is one exception to that concern. Using the protocols included in Mastery Learning and establishing a grading scale of “A”, “B”, or “Incomplete” ( The latter being open to adjustment by further effort on the part of the student or reverting to a “0”/”F”, if not adjusted within the additional time frame allowed.) The educational philosophy behind that scale is making achievement the outcome by making time variable. I used such a system successfully for 2 ½ years.
I’m sure this discussion will resurface after the Covid-19 pandemic is resolved and we can then pursue the matter further. I hope to see/hear your opinions and concerns when that discussion resumes. Stay Healthy.
2] We should make a distinction between that which is being done to address the multiple issues surrounding the “Covid-19 Spring Semester” and that which is being discussed for long term change.
3] I’m not wild about the “A”/”Incomplete” protocol, as it leaves open to question the actual level of achievement. But, I’m not going to stress much about it, as the cause is well known and the necessity both severe and temporary.
4] I find it odd, even to the point of amusement, that John Carlson, the quintessential champion of individual freedoms and “liberty” , would chastise a state official for not coming out against a locally decided policy. Seems as though those individual freedoms pale, when they contain concepts with which Carlson disagrees. But, that’s a discussion for another day.
5] If SPI Reykdal is serious about the likelihood of a “Proficient”/ “Not Proficient” grading protocol becoming the standard in the future, I suspect you & I are going to be in opposition to such a proposal. In my humble opinion, there are more appropriate ways to address the need for “social justice” in American Education than diluting the differentiations in achievement. Also, having taught Freshman Honors Civics and Comparative Cultures, I agree that some students’ level of achievement will move well beyond the ordinary and they deserve credit for those achievements.
6] There is one exception to that concern. Using the protocols included in Mastery Learning and establishing a grading scale of “A”, “B”, or “Incomplete” ( The latter being open to adjustment by further effort on the part of the student or reverting to a “0”/”F”, if not adjusted within the additional time frame allowed.) The educational philosophy behind that scale is making achievement the outcome by making time variable. I used such a system successfully for 2 ½ years.
I’m sure this discussion will resurface after the Covid-19 pandemic is resolved and we can then pursue the matter further. I hope to see/hear your opinions and concerns when that discussion resumes. Stay Healthy.
Comments
Post a Comment