To Fail or Not To Fail

This past weekend, the Globe and Mail published two articles about teaching and I thought I would try to devote a post to each of them. The first article concerns failing students. The article, by Jill Mahoney, goes through many reasons for not failing students, but does provide some of the arguments for failing students.

Let me first explain that in my last few classroom experiences this has been an issue with which I have fought with sleepless nights. I'll out line the arguments for both sides (both of which I agree with) and then I'll offer up my suggestions for a better way.

Arguments for Failing Students:

1. If passing is automatic, then why should students try? If a student doesn't feel like working, failing is one thing that can be hung over students heads. It can be a motivating factor.
2. Failure happens in real life. Students may as well get used to it at an early age. If we give them things without an effort, they will expect it later in life.
3. Eventually, at some level of school (High School) students will need to do work to pass, and they will need skills to pass. If they didn't learn how to add or multiply in elementary school, then who will teach them in highschool? Teachers are expected to be accountable, but I have seen many grade 5 classes where MANY students (not just some) are functioning at grade 3 and 4 levels (and some at grade 1 and 2 levels). These students must be taught these grade 3 and 4 things before they can move on to grade 5 things. (I concede this could also be a problem with curriculum - but more on that one later).
4. If you promote students based on age (and not ability), you end up with a wide range of abilities in a classroom, which makes it much more difficult to teach. Sure it makes a teacher's job easier (and I might sound like I want it easier with this, but that is only a secondary benefit) but it also allows teachers to do more for ALL students.

Arguments for Not Failing Students

1. Self Esteem. I'll accept this argument as long as it applies to the current system. Imagine you are the only one in your whole school who gets held back. Not so fun. Under the current system failing a student can be disastrous.
2. Peer Groups. Students apparently need to be with their peers to develop properly. I can accept this argument in the current system where the failed student would be the only one who is older.
   

So What's My Solution?

Well, it's clear that in the current system, there are great reasons to both fail and to not fail students. Personally I think the system is broken. We are the ones that have placed this stigma on failing by not failing students (I realize that I put way more effort into one of my practicums - that I failed - while many of my students didn't lift a finger in class and were guaranteed to go on to the next grade), and to solve this problem and satisfy all parties we could use a major overhaul of our educations system.

I propose grouping students by abilities and not by age. Students must meet certain standards and criteria to move on to the next grade. I need to explain a few things with this. Does this mean standardized testing? Yes and no. It means a set of standards. There are certain outcomes that students need to demonstrate. They ought to actually have to demonstrate them all before they can move on to the next set. I don't think these should be kept secret from students. They should know what is expected and how to meet each expectation. The second thing I want to make clear is that there should not be this big high stakes failure. If you fail a grade in this system you lose a whole year. In my proposal you could move up and down grades whenever you completed the outcomes for a grade. Students would work with a teacher that helps them meet those expectations and gives them the support they need. In theory everyone in each class would be at the same ability level (more on this below) so students would be able to work on the same thing at the same time.

To make sure students had interaction with their peer group, they would also have a few periods a week (probably at least one a day) where they are with their peer group. I honestly think having students work with students of other ages is more beneficial than having students work with the same group year after year. But what do I know?

One last thought I have for my solution is this: what if a student does really well in Math and poorly in Language Arts? Well, in theory, the school could be set up so that students could go to different classes for each subject depending on their level (though I think this could be difficult if the gap between subjects was very large - as reading is important to EVERYTHING!). I'm sure my system is not perfect and could use some adjustments, but the current system is not exactly perfect.

Thanks for reading all of that.... what do you think???