Calgary school eliminates honour roll; "hurts pride and self-esteem" to not make it

[photon]

Yeah, 2500 isn't much, even when I was going.. As you can see Don Getty was Premier when I won it, that's a loooong time ago.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

3. Won't need calculus and no idea why you learn Shakespeare? Calculus is an option - a lot of people do want to take it. I enjoyed it quite a bit, and so did a lot of my classmates. It develops problem-solving ability and involves abstract thinking which is valued by a lot of employers in a variety of different fields.

In funny she says she'll never need calculous in Alberta as a Province we are probably one of the higest calculus users in the world. Even if most people dont use it day to day. And Math moves to fast? Come on, high school math is the slowest thing ever, and if you are struugling with math the one and only solution is repitition and quite possibly work sheets, which she doesnt seem to like.

[icecube]

Pretty clear almost nobody in this thread bothered to read the Joe Bower article.

Or better yet the links contained in the article that contain mounds of research by Alfie Kohn and others backing Bowers assertions up. Not surprised though.

[troutman]

Ironic Condescension.

[icecube]

You forgot to add a link to www.spedic.com to top off your post

[Dorkmaster]

I don't particularly care one way or another. I used to be a top student but really honour roll wasn't a big deal. Beating your friends, being tops in class meant more. If you don't care about school that much the honour roll also doesn't mean anything either.

[jeffman]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

A grade 11 student's open letter on education

http://blogs.rockyview.ab.ca/blog/20...-to-education/

Some interesting comments on evaluation ( and evaluation is what the honor roll is all about)

Good thing they opened up a new lifeguard factory

[Dion]

Originally Posted by photon

When did that scholarship change? I won that scholarship and it paid for my entire post secondary education!

Nothing personal but scholarships and such were a gear grinder for me back in HS. I worked very hard at my grades but was never an honour student. It would have been great to have had my post secondary education paid

[getbak]

Originally Posted by photon

Yeah, 2500 isn't much, even when I was going.. As you can see Don Getty was Premier when I won it, that's a loooong time ago.

We must have graduated around the same time because mine is also signed by Getty and Gogo. Back then, it was only $1500 ($300 for Grade 10, $500 for Grade 11, and $700 for Grade 12, IIRC).

It sure wasn't enough to pay for my full post-secondary education.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Dion

Nothing personal but scholarships and such were a gear grinder for me back in HS. I worked very hard at my grades but was never an honour student. It would have been great to have had my post secondary education paid

The Rutherford never required one to be an honours student. Simply consistent.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by fatso

Every time I think you've maxed out on BS, you always come back and surprise me!

Not sure why you would think I'm lying. It's not exactly something I'm proud of but it was the byproduct of the my upbringing which was very unconventional as in my brother and I bringing ourselves up with very little parental interaction.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

A lot of the changes she's asking for in that letter have already been made or are being practiced on a wide scale. I know some teachers don't embrace new styles of learning very readily but some of the things she's saying just don't make sense to me.

1. Learning should be more flexible, no more worksheets - I don't know when the last time was that I saw a worksheet - learning today is based around overarching challenging questions, getting students to think about real-world issues and tie curriculum concepts to their lives. I've spent a significant amount of time in a lot of various styles of classrooms over the past year and haven't seen many worksheets except maybe the occasional math problem.

I would agree that learning should be flexible, however grades 0-12 is all about or it was in my day, fundamentals of english, math science and history, learning the basic rules as a starting point and learning more and more about the laws of how things work. As flexible as you want to be the rules that govern math science and english don't change, in soft subjects like literature and even history from a standpoint of interpretation of events they do change. I'm all for the tests and the worksheets, its the only way to ensure that the students get the fundamentals nailed down before they move on to the next. I can't tell you growing up how when people fall behind or don't get it that they are pretty much done. A kid in grade six falls behind on math might never catch up. So yeah, I see worksheets and tests as essential.

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

2. Should the curriculum be about how much information we can fill our heads with? No, with all due respect - has this girl read the curriculum? The curriculum is about concepts, skills, attitudes, ways of thinking, not really about information.

having and understanding fundamentals allows you to participate in the conversation. I would also throw it out there that you can't have a way of thinking without having those fundamentals nailed down and in your head. Again when you talk about subjects that involve literature interpretation and historical interpretation, the concept of memorizing dates or quotes is kind of archaic, however in the sense of history you look like a bit of a blathering fool if you get into a conversation and don't know when it happened and what was involved. But I would agree, on the soft subjects, you could get by with less fact cramming. But in math and the laws of science you almost do have to have those crammed into your head.

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Do you have to know the periodic table by heart? No, can you show me in the curriculum where it says you do?

Its never been about having it memorized by heart, we could always have a periodic table with us, the teaching involved how to use it to classify compounds.

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

3. Won't need calculus and no idea why you learn Shakespeare? Calculus is an option - a lot of people do want to take it. I enjoyed it quite a bit, and so did a lot of my classmates. It develops problem-solving ability and involves abstract thinking which is valued by a lot of employers in a variety of different fields. Shakespeare was a revolutionary playwright who contributed significantly to Western thought, and yes looking at a Shakespearean play in English 20-1 and 30-1 is a requirement as of now but that's about to change with the new curriculum. Shakespeare is widely used because a lot of his work has been adapted into modern feature films and also features poetry which are also parts of the English curriculum (for now), so it allows teachers to 'kill two birds with one stone' so to speak. If you read the curriculum though you would recognize that it's not really about Shakespeare, it's about what his plays say about life, society, love, etc.,

I hated calculus and felt functionally ######ed while doing it, but if you didn't at least take a look at it it would really limit you down the road in terms of university options.

The Shakespeare thing I loved reading his stuff and I'm always grateful that I was introduced to it because frankly I would have never read it otherwise. I think the forced interpretation drove me crazy, sometimes what he wrote was pure entertainment and not a silent protest of socio economic class structures during his time.

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Physical Education is definitely moving away from "play dodgeball for an hour" to more of an actual education about the body. Seriously, read the phys ed program of study, very little of it has to do with actually playing games. It mostly has to do with active and healthy living, nutrition and physical activity - things that are certainly valuable to you as a human being.

Dodge ball keeps the little punks in line and provides a valuable lesson that even in victory there is pain. But I have seen where physical education has opened up from the running climbing ropes and smashing people in the face with hard rubber balls. My nephews get hiking and different modules on non contemporary sports. BTW do they still make kids take ballroom dancing in Gym class because we had to do that and subtle butt grabbing was allowed.

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

5. more tied to experiences - This is definitely the way the curriculum has gone recently and will continue to go in the future, again read the curriculum, this is ALL it is about, getting students to engage in a meaningful way and challenge them to think about concepts in relation to their own lives. Some teachers are able to capture this more effectively than others, obviously. But I agree with her that learning has to be linked to the life of the student or it is meaningless.

We got that all the time in non curriculum based classes. We had the whole auto mechanics and shop and cooking and practicums where you went out in the community for projects. But the base line stuff like the maths and the biologies and the physics had real world examples used. I don't know what she's getting at. And yes its up to the teachers, I'm not talking about a teacher dressing up as George Washington to simulate crossing the Deleware. But its there. Some teachers are way better then others though.

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

6/7. assessment needs to change - I agree, and it is changing. High-stakes testing is on the way out, ongoing formative assessment is on the way in. I have a lot of opinions on testing but one thing I know for sure is having a student write a test and then giving them a percentage grade a few weeks later is not valuable. An ongoing large project with frequent feedback and opportunities for the student to improve their work and get something valuable out of it is likely what we will see once diploma exams have gone away.

I agree and disagree, I like the project idea, but there has to be benchmark testing on fundamental subjects to ensure that kids aren't getting lost. You won't convince me otherwise. I believe strongly in standards testing on maths sciences, grammer and reading comprehension so we can catch and support students falling behind because they don't understand the rules of how these things work.

8/9. Regarding the curriculum being complex, I don't know what's complex about it. It's pretty simple, really. Just try reading it.[/QUOTE]

[fatso]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Not sure why you would think I'm lying. It's not exactly something I'm proud of but it was the byproduct of the my upbringing which was very unconventional as in my brother and I bringing ourselves up with very little parental interaction.

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest you are lying.

I fully expect you actually believe that you did less than 12 hours total homework over 12 years.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I hated calculus and felt functionally ######ed while doing it, but if you didn't at least take a look at it it would really limit you down the road in terms of university options.

Taking Calc did pretty much nothing for University - at least at the UofC. You still had to take introduction to Calculus, but if you had high school calc, you got to take 1 hour less per week.

The stuff you learned was identical too. Such a waste.

[krynski]

If you take away Honour Role, you take away incentive.

What is the point of trying hard if you've got nothing to achieve?

In Junior High/ High School some strive to do well because it means a name on a list or maybe just a good grade.

In University, you strive for that piece of paper.

For some individuals, if you do not dangle anything in front of their faces, they will not know what they can accomplish and will not strive for it.

[Yakbutter]

Honor roll is probably a good thing.

In high school I did the bare minimum go get into university and when I got to Uni I struggled trying to learn how to study and write at an academic level.

Kids trying to get on the honor roll will learn these skills for later when they need them.

[Mr.Coffee]

Generational debates are always rife with wide-sweeping generalizations. It is confusing why these debates are deemed acceptable to say "young people are like this" and "old people are like this" but then you can't say that other demographic subsets are one thing or another... like black people or native people or hispanic people. It's the same thing, you're making a huge generalization based on your bias' and perceptions about a particular demographic.

Anyway all that aside, I'm not sure that this generation or that generation is contributing to wide-spread societal collapse. So they want to change the honour roll situation, who fataing cares? You think that that means that it will make all of our kids soft? I don't, and I also don't think that any particular generational tendency means anything or that society will collapse as a result.

So, pretty sure this is all much ado about nothing.

[Zevo]

Bleeding hearts...next thing you know they are going to want to eliminate fighting from hockey.

[GirlySports]

I thought I was a genius until I got to grade 7 and missed the 1st honour roll in the 1st term.

it was a real wake up call and it made me better