Today, I will be talking about te new grading system at university of Toronto.
I will be talking about the pros and cons about the new grading system and the current grading system.
"The University of Toronto Law wants to make students focus less on marks and more on “intellectual engagement.” (U of T law school adopts new grading system). the current grading system that many other schools have is the letter grade which is leveled A, B, C+, C, C-, F. The the new grading system is the system that does not include letter grades because the U of T law school does not want students to stress on what letter grades they are getting.
The pros about the new grading system is that it may effect the students to not stress out and focus more on the writings, and works they are doing.
"The grouped grading system could be seen as a method of eliminating these worries, saving students from added stress." (No more letter grades at the University of Toronto's law school).
The cons of the new grading system is that it may 'not' help reduce the stress that are troubleing the students. the new grading system can be considered almost the same as the other one, just that the name of the 'letter grades' changed in to high honour, honour, pass, fail...etc.
I, certainly do not think the new grading system will help reduce the stress of students. For many students letter grades are shown as their level of achievment which helps them to study more to get that A+. Also according to the medicine professor Mel Borins
“Students are stressed out mainly around issues of money … whether they’re going to find a job if they do pass all their courses, there’s the stress of family life and their love life, and … the huge workload that sometimes they have to deal with.” (No more letter grades at the University of Toronto's law school) many students does not stress about their grades, they stress out aroud issues of money, their family life, ad love life, and the huge workload.
The Superhero idea, I do not think it will work out very well. First of all it is very childish, and what if the person adores spiderman than superman? Also I would be more stressed if I've got an 'Aquaman' (F) because I would know I've failed and the 'Aquaman' will just annoy me to death.
(A students idea from U of T law school adopts new grading system)
The problem why students may get stress from the 'letter grade' or any sort of grades is because many students compare themselves to others and think they have done terribly, or the parents of theirs will get mad at them for gettng a bad grades. So what I think the school should focus on is teaching them not to compare themselves to others because one is very different from another and has differnt talent, and at least asking the parents not to stress about the mark and flare up to their children.
Online sources:
"U of T law school adopts new grading system"
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2012/04/23/u-of-t-law-school-adopts-new-grading-system/
"No more letter grades at the University of Toronto's law school"
http://cupwire.ca/articles/52673
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Do students really need letter grades?
Do we really need letter grades? Some people say yes when others say no. I will talk about whether we really need these letter grades and the pros and cons of not having letter grades. I will be talking about my point of view and why I think that we do need letter grades.
Universities like law schools of Berkeley, Harvard, Yale and Stanford, all ready have changed their system of marks. University of Toronto Law is thinking of following their example. (A, B+, B, C+, C, D, F) were changed into five broader categories of marks; High Honours, Honours, Pass, Low Pass and Fail. For two years the University of Toronto Law for two years have studied on how to make students less worried about their marks and enjoy what they’re learning. They say that by getting rid of letter grades the students get less stress. But will it really change anything? "Pass/fail system can help reduce students’ anxiety over marks" is what they say. Will it really? Students will just not be aiming for the A. Students would just be aiming for the High Honours. Wouldn't student's still have the stress of trying to get good marks? How will the government know whether it is a good idea to change the marks system?
Pros
Answering some of these question need a little bit of thinking. Some people say that by changing the marking system we are allowing people to excel at what they want and not thinking about the marks. They also say that it is an easier way to categorize people and Alexis Archbold, assistant dean of students says that “it’s good advice for your career”. I found that people who think that this new grading system is a good idea say that it gives them more peace. The people who think that a new grading system is good also think that by making the grading system only into five categories not seven people there will be less stress because of the lack of different marks. Since there is only five categories to go to students have less stress because most people will fall into the same category. People will be able to say “Oh! I passed you only were one category higher than me instead of “Oh! You’re so lucky I only got a D but you got a C.” Aren’t they really the same thing? By dividing the grading system into larger categories people agree there will be less stress because there is less to strive for.
Cons
For me it seems that High Honours, Honours, Pass, Low Pass and Fail marks sounds just more sophisticated than the (A, B+, B, C+, C, D, F). There isn't much of a difference. Either way the students know what it means, and they pretty much have the same amount of stress either way.
I figured out that in the end it’s just the same. The difference between Pass and Honour seem pretty different. High Honours and Honour is like comparing an A+ to and A. There isn’t much of a difference, but a Pass compared to an Honour is quite different. It is similar to a C+ (Which is what I think of an average pass) to an A. It seems to me it give you more stress. Passing and Honours is too much of a jump. It seems like the new grading system is actually asking more from the students. Rebranding is what the new grading system seems to me. It doesn’t matter what happens to the grading system, you know whereabouts each mark is and High Honours sounds just like an A+.
My opinion of the grading system is that there shouldn’t be a change. What is the point? Not all students think the same. Some people could get even more stress from trying to achieve the High Honours. Studies show that the human brain always tries to reach a certain goal. So not matter what the mark is called us humans can’t help but want the best. Pass seems like someone just passed and Honours sound like someone excelled at something. Why are these two right beside each other when there is so much of difference? I think that changing the grading system will do nothing for lessening the amount of stress on students.
Lunch Limits
The stores around Fraser Heights Secondary (Starbucks, Subway, DDDN, etc.) are very fortunate for having us. Why? It is because to them, Fraser Heights Secondary is like a gold mine. If the school were to close down, the stores would lose the hundreds of teenagers buying lunch every day. So why do the teens buy lunch? There are many reasons, including things like forgetting to bring lunch, forgetting to make lunch, and the occasional treat. Most parents/guardians know that they buy lunch and allow them to do it sometimes. Even though parents have given permission, some schools don't trust the parents letting kids buy lunch or even making lunch themselves. They want to prevent obesity and get students to eat healthier. Schools are wanting all of the students to eat in the cafeteria and only the foods they sell. This can cause huge problems because of financial, choice, and other issues.
Some students don't buy lunch not because their parents don't want to waste money or become fat, but it is since that they are in a financial crisis and owe a lot of debts. The other reason is that they are part of the hundreds of new immigrants coming to Canada annually. They wouldn't have a lot of money since they are new to Canada and may have problems buying food. Buying food everyday can make you lose a lot of money and then, people will start eating less, or not eating at all.
Every day I bring food to school to eat, my food is healthy, and I am not obese. I rarely buy lunch, about once a month and that is since my parents don't have time to take me out to restaurants. Most of my friends buy food once a week, sometimes more, but they are not obese either. If the school were to force us to eat in the cafeteria, neither me nor my friends would be able to eat at stores. No donuts, frappuccinos, pizza, or other treats. Only healthy food.
There are other things that could happen if students are forced to eat in the cafeteria. The cafeteria would have to change its menu and make the menu larger for more choice. They would need more cooks and food to provide hundreds of students food. They would also have to rebuild the cafeteria and make it larger to serve food faster. The stores around the school would also have a great decrease in customers. Students and parents would also start protesting since they dislike the way that the school thinks that they have control over the students.
A public school is not a day-care center. We do not pay the school to take care of us, so why would they have the right to control what we eat? That is something a parent needs to do for their child. The better way of solving obesity is being more active (physically). The school could try to get their students to walk/bike to school if they live close. They could also tell students to exercise more, though that usually doesn't work.
In conclusion, schools shouldn't have the right to tell students what to eat and what not to eat, and parents should control their kids more. A good parent would already have given their child restrictions on what they can and cannot do.
Sources:
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/04/26/the-state-has-no-place-in-the-lunch-bags-of-a-nation/
Some students don't buy lunch not because their parents don't want to waste money or become fat, but it is since that they are in a financial crisis and owe a lot of debts. The other reason is that they are part of the hundreds of new immigrants coming to Canada annually. They wouldn't have a lot of money since they are new to Canada and may have problems buying food. Buying food everyday can make you lose a lot of money and then, people will start eating less, or not eating at all.
Every day I bring food to school to eat, my food is healthy, and I am not obese. I rarely buy lunch, about once a month and that is since my parents don't have time to take me out to restaurants. Most of my friends buy food once a week, sometimes more, but they are not obese either. If the school were to force us to eat in the cafeteria, neither me nor my friends would be able to eat at stores. No donuts, frappuccinos, pizza, or other treats. Only healthy food.
There are other things that could happen if students are forced to eat in the cafeteria. The cafeteria would have to change its menu and make the menu larger for more choice. They would need more cooks and food to provide hundreds of students food. They would also have to rebuild the cafeteria and make it larger to serve food faster. The stores around the school would also have a great decrease in customers. Students and parents would also start protesting since they dislike the way that the school thinks that they have control over the students.
A public school is not a day-care center. We do not pay the school to take care of us, so why would they have the right to control what we eat? That is something a parent needs to do for their child. The better way of solving obesity is being more active (physically). The school could try to get their students to walk/bike to school if they live close. They could also tell students to exercise more, though that usually doesn't work.
In conclusion, schools shouldn't have the right to tell students what to eat and what not to eat, and parents should control their kids more. A good parent would already have given their child restrictions on what they can and cannot do.
Sources:
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/04/26/the-state-has-no-place-in-the-lunch-bags-of-a-nation/
Should post secondary institutions require mandatory physical fitness as part of their educational program?
Should post secondary institutions require mandatory physical fitness as
part of their educational program? All first year students that are part of the
Burnaby polytechnic’s computer programs have mandatory gym time. They are
required to be inside the campus gym by 8:30 a.m. to sign an attendance sheet.
If they don’t attend, they would not graduate even though physical education
has nothing to do with technology. Many find this insulting because they are
the only group of students on campus that are being forced to be physically
active. Now, a petition asking that the mandatory gym class be dropped has
dozens of signed names.
Brian Pidcock, the associate dean in charge of computer students, has a
different point of view from his students. He thinks that forcing the students
to exercise is for their own good. He finds that people tend to sit for hours and
hours in front of a computer, especially in computing. He also said that
programming was very time consuming and tiring so his intentions were good. The
format also offers lots of choices. They can do any exercise or even walk around
the track and it’s not like high school physical education, where you sometimes
are forced to do something you don’t want to. More than 50% of the computer
students disagreed with his point and one presented a petition in his lectures
and labs.
Most students taking computer programs had the opposite point of view of
Brian Pidcock. They thought that it was important to bring fairness and
equality across the board for all BCIT students but it currently has not been
happening. It was something that was not forced upon anyone else. Many said
that they were adults and should be given the option of taking care of their own
health and spending their time. Many also agreed that the practice of isolating
computer students for physical education was based on stereotypes. For these
reasons, the students created a petition.
Both sides of arguments have strong reasons stating either if they want
to continue to have mandatory physical fitness or to not keep the class. Having
the intention to help others stay healthy is great but letting others have
their own decisions on their health is better since everyone has the right to
control their life and choose to have other ways to stay healthy. Since the
petition showed broad- based opposition, a curriculum committee will soon
decide whether to keep the class at all.
Sites Used
CE Post
Recently the government has presented "Bill
36". One of the ideas that’s included in this bill is "year round
school" or "balanced calendar". There are always pros and cons
to every idea, so lets take a look.
Some people think this "balanced
calendar" is great! They believe that by having less time between breaks
(like summer vacation) helps you not to forget everything you learned the
previous year. Most people, (like me) decide to let loose, and not bother
reviewing anything, or try not t o think of the word "school" over
the summer holidays. This is what causes you to forget what u learned. By
having more breaks throughout the year means we will have a shorter summer
vacation giving us less time to forget. Apparently some people think we are
bored through the summer, so after school activities throughout the year will
kill time. This will also make trips more affordable for families since
flights are usually more expensive during the summer, so this makes it easier
and more affordable to take trips not during the same breaks as most other
schools.
There are also just as many cons as pros if
not more AGAINST year round schooling. First of all, camps and or summer
programs will suffer considering how we will have less time in the summer to
actually GO to camp. So eventually they will deteriorate and go out of
business. Secondly, when we are in school during July it will be extremely hot
in the school and especially in the portables, and most schools DON'T have air
conditioning causing us to be very sweaty and uncomfortable during school. Also
some kids' parents work in other school districts causing them to be on totally
different schedules, which will affect the homes of families. Costs will
go up for schools since you will need air conditioning, and use light and such
more often. Lastly, if you have children who are in different schools and only
one is doing year round school, it will be harder to organize vacations both
kids can go to.
I personally think using a
"balanced calendar" isn't the best idea since i agree with most if
not all the cons, but hey, people are entitled to their own opinion.
Sources:
http://childparenting.about.com/od/schoollearning/a/year-round-school-pros-cons.htm
http://712educators.about.com/cs/reformtime/a/yearrounded.htm
http://lifestyle.iloveindia.com/lounge/pros-and-cons-of-year-round-school-3964.html
Do Students Really Need Letter Grades?
Yes, people may ask, “Why do we need letter grades? Students are
still learning without them.” Letter grades may be essential for you but needless
for others. A new grading system was created in U of T, the argument of if the
system is necessary has presented. So ask yourself. Do we really need letter
grades? Here is the problem, benefits, losses, and how I see it.
University of Toronto spent two years studying on how to reduce students’
stress about marks. They came to a point which they could be the first school
in Canada to substitute the traditional letter grading system to a wider range
of pass and fail. The University of Toronto Law faculty wants to change; they
want a system with categories consisting: High Honours, Honours, Pass, Low
Pass, and Fail. Few law schools in United States like Stanford and Yale already
used a similar system.
According to teachers and leaders of U of T this new grading system can reduce student’s anxiety over their marks. Instead of students worrying if the information is going to be on a test, they want to provide a space in which there is no pressure and students can actually understand more deeply on their learning. From their point of view, their idea is students will learn better without any pressure of marks.
Here is another question asked among people who disagrees with this
idea, “Does this new system really reduce students’ stress?” This new system is
just like the traditional grading system, but with more considerate names. A+
and A to the High Honours, B and C+ to Honours etc… Students are not stressed
over the grading system but over their process in school. It does not matter
how you change the grading system, students will continue to stress about their
grades as long as they are getting a poor mark. Watch the video
First put aside my opinion of the new system, it might be very difficult just to carry out this new system. It is hard to say if any school in Canada is going to follow this new grading system. Honestly, I think the new grading system is unnecessary. Students need a little bit of pressure in order to do well in school, a motivation. I like the traditional system better because you can atleast know more specifically about where your skills and participation in class are at. However this new system cannot tell you precisely where you are at, it is an “about” range. I will be stressed if I get D or F in school but I will also be stressed if I get a low pass or a fail. They are somewhat the same thing, so I think it is pointless to change the system.
Sites I used:
Draft Copies
Guys,
Publish your posts properly.
you guys posted as a draft so I can't see your posts on the actual blog.,
Publish your posts properly.
you guys posted as a draft so I can't see your posts on the actual blog.,
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
CE Writing
This week I am going to be
writing about the pros and cons of the "Year-round" and
"Balanced" calendar. I am going to talk about the definition of
"Year-round" and "balanced" calendars, and the pros and
cons along with what I think.
The definition of the "Year-round" and
"Balanced" calendar is that, like we discussed in class, will not
increase the time we are in school. As we discussed in class there are a
certain numbers of days we have to be in school for and we will still have the
same amount of time in school, it is not like we will have more or less school,
it is just that our breaks will be spread out in different places. One and the
most chosen example of an "Year-round" calendar is 45-15. This means
that students will be in school for 45 days and then gets 3 weeks off not
accounting for weekends. The normal breaks like holidays will be put into the
new calendar.
A couple pros to the "Year-round" calendar are
that some students forget all that they learned over the long summer break,
where as the shorter breaks the students will not forget as much. This system also makes students are
engaged in a number of after-school activities, to kill their boredom, because
the activities would keep them busy during the 3 week break. Now it is possible
for families to plan shorter trips to different places instead of one long trip
once an year. I'm not saying that these are the only advantages, I just listed
a little bit of it.
A couple of arguments
against the "Year-round" calendar are that some schools are older and
do not have air conditioning, so during the summer time the schools are going
to be quite hot. So for people who can't concentrate in the heat is not going
to learn as much or stay on focus as well. An argument against the
"Year-round" calendar is that student are going to forget some
information even if they are out of school for 3 weeks. If a parent has two
children and one of the two children is on the "Year-round" school
system and one is on the "Traditional" school system then it is harder
for the parent to plan a vacation. And like the pros these are not the only
arguments against the "Year -round" calendar.
Right now for me I don’t think it will affect me a lot
but when I need to get a summer job or job experience later on in high school
it may affect me, unless the learning curriculum changes, it will affect me.
Right now, in grade 8, I actually don’t mind the "Year-round" and
"Balanced" calendar. Overall I don’t really like the idea of
"Year-round" calendar, especially because in the summer time I can
barely focus on my work in the heat. So my final answer to the new system is
no. I do not want the new system.
Source/Bibliography
Kelly, Melissa. "Year
Round Education." About.com 8th May 2012
<http://712educators.about.com/cs/reformtime/a/yearrounded.htm>
"Pros And Cons Of Year Round School" iloveindia.com
8th May 2012 <http://lifestyle.iloveindia.com/lounge/pros-and-cons-of-year-round-school-3964.html>
Monday, May 7, 2012
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)