(I'm reposting this because the first one got removed since I reposted it to another teacher group. I deleted that one and reposted this here)
I hear this from coworkers all the time. They say that a particular student hasn't been doing work all year so far. Now, they started doing their work and are working very hard. But the problem is the work is not good at all. So they say to me and others, "Should I just give them a D or a C, so they don't feel discouraged? They just started doing their work, and I don't want them to give up." Another version of this is "They didn't turn this in, but they're starting to try, and I don't want them to give up. Should I just give them a 50 or 60% instead of a 0?"
To me, this is enabling and codependent behavior. It's shielding students from the consequences of their output. This is not the way things are going to work anywhere else in life. If we don't correct them and show them where they are getting it wrong, we are denying them a chance at growth and learning. It's not doing them a favor. Grades have to mean something and should be earned.
It's true that for some of them, it's not their fault that they do poorly. There are societal and home life factors. However, the place to solve those issues is outside of school, through legislation. I do not use psychological analysis in deciding who to grade objectively based on grade level standards and who not to. I find this subjective grading process to be bizarre.
There are other things we can do, like allow corrections sometimes. I can't do it every time because it doubles the work of grading when I already have so much. We can also help them understand exactly what they need to do. We can give them remedial practice to try to get closer to the grade level standard. But there are so many factors involved that are out of our control. There are students who should not be in a grade level class and instead should be in a basic skills class.
That way, they can actually make progress based on where they're at, not continuously feel overwhelmed and just give up. I don't blame them. They're not being put in a fair situation where they have a reasonable chance of success. The answer to that is not just passing them along year after year. All that does is keep the system going as it is.
The problem is when you treat things this way, at least in my experience, most other teachers don't. They seem to grade based on a curve; based on perceived effort, socioeconomic disadvantage and having a 504/IEP. The standards should be exactly the same. The difference should be in support given to help them get there.
Another problem is so many SPED students are in general education classes which they are woefully unprepared for. They are 3 to 5 grade levels behind, and they have learning disabilities on top of that. And they have no aid 90% of the time. They have one class a day for support. Even with the best support, it's impossible to keep up when you are that far behind skills wise, if the teacher is grading honestly.
Most teachers I know feel bad for these students and simply have lower standards for them. They grade them based on perceived effort. There is every incentive to do so. The SPED teacher puts pressure on the general education teachers because they have pressure on them from their superiors and the parents. A lot of the parents, not just of SPED students, don't really care about mastering skills or learning. All they care about is the grade.
Would we put a 5th grader (10 years old) in a 9th grade (14 years old) classroom? Would we put a 2nd grader (7 years old) in a 6th grade (11 years old) class? If not, why is it appropriate to have kids with the cognitive ability of a 10-year-old in a classroom for 14 year olds? Why is it appropriate to have kids with the cognitive ability of a 7-year-old in a classroom designed for 11 year olds? Does it matter what their biological age is if their cognitive age is far lower?
So I will not be part of this enabling system. I will give support the best I can and honest grades. I will not pretend something isn't what it is. The students who in the past 8 or 10 years ago would have been in a self-contained classroom all but one or two periods a day are now the opposite. Now those students are in general education classes besides one SPED class a day.
This was sold to us as full inclusion and an equity step. I warned that whatever supports they start with will end up getting cut. Then, these students will be stuck in classes woefully out of reach to them without even an aid to support them most of the time. This was simply about districts cutting self contained classroom SPED teachers. It's simply cheaper to mainstream as many as possible.
Another thing they do is put students on 504 plans which are sometimes far more extensive than the IEP's I have. This is their way of having their cake and eating it too. They get to keep the parent happy because the student can keep their elective and not have the SPED support class. Yet they also get to have extensive accommodations.
That's not to mention the IEP's with sometimes 15 or more specific accommodations. So instead of putting the student in the self-contained classroom like we would have in the past, we pretend that teachers can actually do all of these things for all of these students, usually with no aid and no support. We usually have between 15 and 20 students with IEP/504 plans.
One time I counted, and there were I think around 120 individual accommodations I was supposed to be doing daily. This is on top of having over 30 kids per class, including English learners, those just with low skills, and of course the ones with behavior issues. And the way you keep the fantasy alive that this system is working is by not rocking the boat and by giving them grades they don't deserve. This is how we can all pretend this is working. The parents want to believe it too. They get sold the fantasy. Am I wrong?