Or they could work on policies that reward significant improvement throughout the year. A rough start can be just that. Mandating that everything is at least 50%, even when a student gets a 0%, is a terrible idea.
My school did this w/ gym. The resulting structure basically rewards students for not giving it their all early on and conversely punishes students who don't game the system. I'm not saying that improvement based grading is inherently bad. You can add 'effort' to counter this flaw but it can become pretty subjective.
I would argue that gym should be pass / fail, with pass meaning you participated.
Either that, or you have to do some pretty stupid stuff to "level the playing field" for those that are physically gifted in the select sports that your gym has decided to test.
My brother completely rocked in ping pong back in high school (could play for days without dropping a single game), that should more than make up for his inability to hit a baseball, or his less than stellar basketball skills.
I would argue that gym is different than academic courses, and therefore should be graded differently.
I'll take that challenge!! I would argue that you were obviously a 98-lb weakling in high school, and therefore your personal experience with humiliation in aforementioned gym class has prejudiced you beyond the ability to conduct a rational argument. I win.
Ad hominem is an argument. Technically.
I was an average sized kid and lettered in soccer, but still got picked on by this thug named Tommy Newsome. It wasn't anything special to me; he hated anyone who breathed through their nose. One day, I waited until he was in the shower, stole his towel, threw it in his locker, and filled the combination lock with superglue. And then retreated to a safe distance. He wasn't very happy to be naked and dripping wet and find his hand glued to his own lock.
Tommy, if you've learned to read and they have compu
Indeed. I was captain of my cross country team, and set some course records even. I got a 'C' in gym that year. No kidding. I always went to gym class, and always accomplished what they wanted. It was a popularity thing, and at my redneck school, football, baseball, and wrestling were all that mattered. I was also a 'band fag' which probably contributed to the bigoted low mark.
Why? In my high school, all classes were graded based on four things.
1) Quizes and Tests. 2) Homework. 3) Attendence/Participation. 4) Improvement over the course of the class.
My gym class was based on three of the four (no homework obviously). Tests were acedemic tests about the rules and scoring of whatever sport you were currently studying. Participation was the amount of effort you put into the class. Improvement was based on the 'standardized' physical tests (presidents fitness tests and the like)
Disobedience: The silver lining to the cloud of servitude.
-- Ambrose Bierce
Or more reasonable policies (Score:5, Insightful)
Or they could work on policies that reward significant improvement throughout the year. A rough start can be just that. Mandating that everything is at least 50%, even when a student gets a 0%, is a terrible idea.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Or more reasonable policies (Score:5, Interesting)
I would argue that gym is different than academic courses, and therefore should be graded differently.
Re: (Score:1)
When I was going to grade school, there were
"President's physical fitness tests" that were required of everyone. I think that was Dick Nixon's idea.
Re: (Score:2)
JFK, I think.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah ... like if you show up you pass....
Stupid gym class....
Re: (Score:2)
Either that, or you have to do some pretty stupid stuff to "level the playing field" for those that are physically gifted in the select sports that your gym has decided to test.
My brother completely rocked in ping pong back in high school (could play for days without dropping a single game), that should more than make up for his inability to hit a baseball, or his less than stellar basketball skills.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I would argue that gym is different than academic courses, and therefore should be graded differently.
I'll take that challenge!! I would argue that you were obviously a 98-lb weakling in high school, and therefore your personal experience with humiliation in aforementioned gym class has prejudiced you beyond the ability to conduct a rational argument. I win.
Ad hominem is an argument. Technically.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, an expert witness! But sir, I question your impartiality. Dear jury, this man has karma to gain!
Re: (Score:2)
I was an average sized kid and lettered in soccer, but still got picked on by this thug named Tommy Newsome. It wasn't anything special to me; he hated anyone who breathed through their nose. One day, I waited until he was in the shower, stole his towel, threw it in his locker, and filled the combination lock with superglue. And then retreated to a safe distance. He wasn't very happy to be naked and dripping wet and find his hand glued to his own lock.
Tommy, if you've learned to read and they have compu
Re: (Score:2)
And if he doesn't accept the ad hominem argument, then we'll just kick his ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. I was captain of my cross country team, and set some course records even. I got a 'C' in gym that year. No kidding. I always went to gym class, and always accomplished what they wanted. It was a popularity thing, and at my redneck school, football, baseball, and wrestling were all that mattered. I was also a 'band fag' which probably contributed to the bigoted low mark.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? In my high school, all classes were graded based on four things.
1) Quizes and Tests.
2) Homework.
3) Attendence/Participation.
4) Improvement over the course of the class.
My gym class was based on three of the four (no homework obviously). Tests were acedemic tests about the rules and scoring of whatever sport you were currently studying. Participation was the amount of effort you put into the class. Improvement was based on the 'standardized' physical tests (presidents fitness tests and the like)