COLUMN: SBRC is TMI
Over the last few years, Standards Based Report Cards have become a big fad in many schools. But they are controversial and not everyone, including many educators, believe SBRCs are worthwhile.
That was to be the subject this week at a meeting of Jackson County School System middle school teachers and leaders. The school system is reportedly planning to put SBRCs in its middle schools, a move that is drawing some stiff resistance from teachers.
For the uninitiated, SBRCs are extremely detailed report cards about a student’s progress. But in some cases, schools have done away with the traditional letter grades and now only use a numerical scale of 1-4 on the various aspects of an SBRC.
Supporters of the SBRC system say the more detailed report cards is better and gives parents much more information than traditional letter grades. For example, in the subject of “Reading,” an SBRC report can break it down into several categories, such as speed, fluency, accuracy, etc. And an SBRC reporting allows for other non-academic grading, such as effort, behavior, motivation, etc.
Currently used in many local elementary schools, many from both inside and outside the school system don’t think it should be expanded into middle schools.
This issue brings to the fore one of the biggest problems in the public education system — an inability to communicate clearly. For a profession that is so focused on teaching — communicating information to students — education leaders fare poorly in general communications.
Educrats tend to spin information they report to the public and to lace it with obtuse jargon. At the state level, standardized test results are always phrased to sound good even when those results are, in reality, bad. But this educrat spin is so transparent and clumsy, it undermines public confidence in the entire system.
One of the worst tendencies in all this is that education leaders tend to believe there is no such thing as too much data. School leaders are heavily addicted to numerical evaluations, as if numbers have the power to answer all questions and clear up all assumptions.
What education leaders fail to realize, however, is that there is such a thing as “too much information.” More data doesn’t equate better communication; often, it just obscures the truth.
Many parents don’t want a 25-point detailed summary of their child’s reading ability; they want to know if he is an A, B or C student. They understand that. It’s part of the American education culture, ingrained from decades of use.
Getting a “B” may not detail specific strengths or weaknesses about a child, but most parents instinctively understand what a “B” grade is. It’s a shorthand way to say a lot of things without having to decipher foggy data points. (Even if a parent knows his child lacks reading “fluency,” what is he supposed to do about it?)
There are some limited uses of SBRC reporting. Students who have developmental delays or other problems might benefit from a detailed analysis that acts as a guide for outside tutors, psychologists, etc. And for internal use at a school, it’s helpful for teachers to know a student’s strengths and weaknesses from the past.
But for 90 percent of parents, SBRC reporting is TMI.
And for the life of me, I don’t understand why the school system, amid its financial problems, would want to pursue this expensive idea anyway.
Mike Buffington is editor of The Jackson Herald. He can be reached at mike@mainstreetnews.com.
For the uninitiated, SBRCs are extremely detailed report cards about a student’s progress. But in some cases, schools have done away with the traditional letter grades and now only use a numerical scale of 1-4 on the various aspects of an SBRC.
Supporters of the SBRC system say the more detailed report cards is better and gives parents much more information than traditional letter grades. For example, in the subject of “Reading,” an SBRC report can break it down into several categories, such as speed, fluency, accuracy, etc. And an SBRC reporting allows for other non-academic grading, such as effort, behavior, motivation, etc.
Currently used in many local elementary schools, many from both inside and outside the school system don’t think it should be expanded into middle schools.
This issue brings to the fore one of the biggest problems in the public education system — an inability to communicate clearly. For a profession that is so focused on teaching — communicating information to students — education leaders fare poorly in general communications.
Educrats tend to spin information they report to the public and to lace it with obtuse jargon. At the state level, standardized test results are always phrased to sound good even when those results are, in reality, bad. But this educrat spin is so transparent and clumsy, it undermines public confidence in the entire system.
One of the worst tendencies in all this is that education leaders tend to believe there is no such thing as too much data. School leaders are heavily addicted to numerical evaluations, as if numbers have the power to answer all questions and clear up all assumptions.
What education leaders fail to realize, however, is that there is such a thing as “too much information.” More data doesn’t equate better communication; often, it just obscures the truth.
Many parents don’t want a 25-point detailed summary of their child’s reading ability; they want to know if he is an A, B or C student. They understand that. It’s part of the American education culture, ingrained from decades of use.
Getting a “B” may not detail specific strengths or weaknesses about a child, but most parents instinctively understand what a “B” grade is. It’s a shorthand way to say a lot of things without having to decipher foggy data points. (Even if a parent knows his child lacks reading “fluency,” what is he supposed to do about it?)
There are some limited uses of SBRC reporting. Students who have developmental delays or other problems might benefit from a detailed analysis that acts as a guide for outside tutors, psychologists, etc. And for internal use at a school, it’s helpful for teachers to know a student’s strengths and weaknesses from the past.
But for 90 percent of parents, SBRC reporting is TMI.
And for the life of me, I don’t understand why the school system, amid its financial problems, would want to pursue this expensive idea anyway.
Mike Buffington is editor of The Jackson Herald. He can be reached at mike@mainstreetnews.com.
The teacher no longer “grades” the student’s work based upon objective areas (say grammar use on an essay) they use subjective “grading” (how hard did little Timmy try on this) that leaves it to the teacher’s FEELINGS about how a student is performing. Also, they can use their personal feelings about the student to “assist” in the grading effort. So let’s use the three examples she gave me:
Student A does a math assignment and misses 55% of the questions, fail right? WRONG! Mrs. Apple knows just how hard Student A TRIES on her math work, but she just can’t seem to get the basics, so she gives her a 4 for effort! Besides, she is such a sweet girl and always raises her hand before speaking; and OH, her parents just got divorced and that is so sad!
Student B is a science Genius! She teach Mrs. Beaker how to build a fission reactor using a paper plate, hockey puck, and a garden hose filled with ice cubes. Mrs. Beaker’s only problem with Student B is that she talks in class (well that and the whole showed her up with the invention of a time machine during recess thing) so she FEELS that a 4 would not be appropriate, so she gives her a 2.
Student C can read on a College level in 2nd grade. This student out reads every other child in the school, and gets a billion “AR” points! Student C has already read every book that the students are required to read for 2nd grade by the third week of school! Student C gets bored and doesn’t want to read for a week. Mr. Barnes A. Noble decides that Student C isn’t “applying themselves” and gives them a 3 in reading comprehension. Obviously being able to read and pass a test using the knowledge you gained from reading (you know, being able to COMPREHEND what you read) has nothing to do with reading comprehension.
How does this set our kids up for failure? Because in the real world; everything isn’t about how hard you try, it is whether you succeed in your tasks. In the corporate world a boss wants results, they don’t keep an employee that can’t do the job, but they sure tried! Do you want a Doctor that TRIES to perform surgery but they can’t do it? How about a teacher for your child that can’t teach, but they really are nice! A tax preparer that can't figure out this whole math thing, you'd be ok with the IRS Audit and fines right? How about a policeman who can’t drive a car or shoot a pistol, but they have GREAT penmanship! Kudos to our elected officials that think that this latest moronic idea will make for a better education system.
In Closing
“Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
--Mark Twain
There are certainly things about SBRC that need to be revamped however, to say that traditional grading was better is a joke.
Schools are now using "Standards" that indicate where all students should be at a given time. You can view them here - http://www.georgiastandards.org. These standards were not in use when the "traditional" number and letter grades were in. Our job as teachers is to teach the students the material listed for that grade level, help them catch up if they need it, or help them advance. Since students are now being taught by these standards, the reporting of grades has changed. The reason for this is to show parents exactly what their student is doing in school. There should not be any “feelings” involved by teachers when they assess their students. They are looking at what they know or do not know. We are strictly answering the question, “did the student meet the standard independently". Do they understand exactly what it is Georgia wants them to know? How can they exceed this standard - did they give me more information than what the standard expects? Are they still in progress - what is it that they are not grasping and cannot meet this standard independently on? Did they not meet (the standard) at all - is the student still on level 1 and not showing any progress?
As teachers, it is appropriate that we have this information. I understand it is A LOT of information. We keep many detailed records, much more than was kept with "traditional" grading. Documentation is key to SBRC.
As parents, you should want this important information. This is your baby, your child. Let's say your student got a "B" on the traditional report card. She/he brought it home and you say, "OK, do better next time". Now, with the SBRC, she/he brings the report home and you see that they "met/3" adding and subtracting, but are "in progress/2" on multiplying and dividing. Instead of vaguely telling them to do better you could reply, "Great job on adding and subtracting; now let’s practice on multiplying and dividing" and use this as a guide to help them at home.
SBRC is a wonderful tool that is IN PROGRESS but will continuously get better.
grandparents to raise the grandchildren and We as grandparents are not understanding why alot of the math and other subjects are being tought to these litte children that I had when I was in high school. And some of the teachers are tried of teaching because of the way this old world is getting and the teachers who want to teach can not do it beause it ain't the old way. When I was going to school my parents spanked me if I misbehaved in school when I got home or if I got a bad grade. Boy did I pay for it but my Dad has passed and I don't regret them days because at least our parents cared and could understand the old grading system.
A = Excellent
B = Good
C = Average
D = Poor / Needs Improvement
F = Failing (spanking)
All this beating things to death on each subject, rating this and rating that is a bunch of extra time spent that could be used doing something else. Teachers are teachers...not psychologists. Whose to say they are even qualified to "rate" some of the categories required on some of these new reports. Next we'll need a nutrutionist to decide if what they had for dinner conflicted with what should have been fed them to have their minds in a learning frame (or) does the child seem to learn better with a light blue wall, a peach colored one or just white.
Well, why doesn't someone take the time to check out the so called scores that this SBRC is supposed to help. Why doesn't someone take the time to check out why many students are leaving the county system (including teacher's kids)? Could it possibly be that the teachers don't have time to teach or get to know their students because they are in meetings everyday taking on some new whiz-bang theory? Could it possibly mean they have become a jack of all trades and a master of none? I would say YES!
The simple fact is that there isn't research to support SBRC. Someone in educrat think-tank got the idea stuck in their head and won't let it go regardless of how bad it is for students, not to mention teachers.
SBRC also doesn't motivate students to do better. If a student is told they have a "meets the standard," where is the incentive to do any better? It's not there and they won't do it. As someone said earlier, the real world won't keep an employee because they tried really hard.
SBRC is leading the next generation to do the minimum to get by, and the "leaders" can't see it. And did I mention that the few places that have implemented SBRC have stopped using it?
Jackson County School System leadership, GET A CLUE!
I think Commerce schools are using it also. So why are all the comments only toward Jackson County?
It seems to me that the grading is used to affect teaching as much as it used to assess students progress.
The simple truth is that not all people will fit into these standards. People are born with different skills, different strengths/weaknesses and not every student will fit the mold the state wants them to fit into. The older person who posted above had a good point. Many children are not ready for algebra in elementary school. Their brains have not developed to the point to think abstractly. To try to teach these children algebra is not developmentally appropriate and could do more harm than good.
I enjoy progress and achievement as much as anyone, but some things you just can't hurry up.