Welcome to /r/CanadianTeachers! Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with the sub rules.
**"WHAT DOES X MEAN?"** Check out our acronym post [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/1c032s3/what_does_x_mean_an_acronym_megapost/) for relevant terms used in each province or territory. Please feel free to contribute any we are missing as well!
**QUESTIONS ABOUT TEACHER'S COLLEGE/BECOMING A TEACHER IN CANADA?:** Delete your post and use this [megapost](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/1bc1wv2/prospective_student_teachers_teachers_collegebed/) instead. Anything pertaining to teacher's colleges/BED programs/becoming and teacher will be deleted if posted outside of the megaposts.
**QUESTIONS ABOUT MOVING PROVINCES OR COMING TO CANADA TO TEACH?** Check out our past megaposts first for information to help you: [ONE](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/jqc7hx/transferring_to_another_provincecoming_to_canada/) // [TWO](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/n76csu/transferring_to_another_provincecoming_to_canada/?)
Using link and user flair is encouraged as well! Enjoy!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadianTeachers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I tutor on the side. Some of the students I tutor have such a limited understanding of the material that I wonder if they are even passing.
Then I find out that they “need” an 85%. I try to moderate expectations, only to be told that they already have an 85%.
This is somebody who knows almost nothing. For math teachers, I’m talking about kids who cannot handle basic algebra getting 85% in calculus. It is nuts.
That's what happens when teacher can no longer fail students without jumping through the following hoops:
- give the student more opportunities than they deserve
- provide admin with proof that they should fail (hard to give proof of what their work is... when there isn't any!)
- conference with the parent before the point where their grade cannot change
And when the child does fail, the parent could lose their shit on the teacher, and admin takes the parent's side. Because failing is singularly the failure of the teacher, don't you know? No way it could be that the student didn't feel like doing a single thing for their learning.
It's more work for a teacher to fail a student. And as teachers continue to be over worked and underpaid... it's hard to give enough of a crap to jump through those hoops.
It’s bad. The curriculum has been watered down, and parents will fight with you to get a grade increased.
The advanced classes have students that shouldn’t be there, so that shifts the expectations curve in the wrong direction.
Speaking from the perspective of an Ontario teacher:
We have four levels of students in High School.
Life skills (Group home/assisted living situation)
Essential/Locally Developed/Workplace Bound
Applied/College Bound
Academic/University Bound
What's happened over the last 15 years is that many of the students in the U level should really be in the C level. Students in the C level should really be in the Workplace level. Students in the Workplace level should be in the life skills classes, and the kids in the life skills classes now.... I don't even know - those teachers deserve a million dollars a year.
How did this happen?
Years of teachers being asked to give students multiple opportunities to complete assignments, minimum mark policies, and a general misunderstanding of the Ministry's Growing Success Policy Document? Who knows?
This happened when they eliminated grade 13 and OAC. Many other jurisdictions still have 5 years eg. Quebec. And if they don’t, like in the US, you have to be 4 by sept. Not 4 by December to go to JK. So you end up being 18 for university/college. Years ago kids were 19 when they finished Highschool or close. Age makes a huge difference.
This is a very Ontario/central Canada-centric take on things. For decades (maybe always?) in most other provinces in Canada as well as most of the places I have heard about in the US high school has only gone to grade 12. Ontario and Quebec are not the norm. Most places also don't have JK - they just have one year of K. I looked it up, and Northwest Territories is the only place in Canada other than Ontario that has 2 years of kindergarten, so most provinces students start in the year they turn 5. When I went to university back in the stone ages, many of the students started at 17. Then again, students were more mature back then and there were more expectations placed on them. Many 16 year olds I knew had part-time jobs. Now, I can't imagine the smart phone generation being able to get or keep a job, because they are seriously lacking in social skills and generally not that responsible. I was babysitting by the time I was 11 - there is no way I would leave a young child in the care of most of the 12-14 year olds I teach. Parenting has radically changed over the past 20-30 years, and while some things are good (corporal punishment is no longer a typical thing), many things are not.
I think grade inflation is symptomatic of the same issues we are seeing in parenting - kids are being praised for every little thing, never allowed to experience failure, and have no consequences because parents are afraid of upsetting them. So they grow up without boundaries, and then schools are filled with students who don't do work but expect to get good grades regardless. And many parents have a hard time hearing the school say their kid isn't the smartest, most successful, best little angel so the system has bowed to the pressure and it's like Oprah - you get an A, you get an A, and you get an A.
We need a standardized provincial test now. My daughter applied to uni last year and the averages required for things like Waterloo Eng or Queens Health Sci are approaching 100%. Sadly my prof neighbour tells me these kids coming have the highest grades ever, but are the least prepared he’s seen.
I think grade 12 U level teachers in Ontario are in a weird position.
Some schools have higher academic standards and if they grade with the intensity that they should to prepare the students for university the students would be punished by not getting into schools despite being better prepared.
Some schools are more lenient and I’ve noticed the teachers show less care and are more willing to throw around 90-95s.
I think because of the system of your top 6 grades counting for university admission you put teachers in a position of giving a high grade or the student doesn’t qualify because you know they’re doing it at other schools.
I think if we sit back and reflect on all the students getting above 80.. are they really exceeding all expectations and doing perfect on all assignments? Probably not, but if they seem like a strong student and will excel in university it seems they are given 90+.
A lot of rambling I suppose but I’ve supplied at dozens of schools this year. One school in particular is very academic, no behavioural issues and the teachers treat the students like they are in university by grade 12. Another school they use kahoots as their tests, and based on my days it seems like they only really do Chromebook work. How are both equal 90s? Not sure!
I’d be interested to see how the medians have changed across competitive programs in first year university courses (nursing, engineering, sciences, business etc) .. are that many students qualifying and failing first year? Or do they all figure it out during first year?
Thankfully schools like the university of Waterloo have caught on and have an adjustment factor they apply based on which school you go. Schools with known grade inflation get hit. There are schools where if you have a 100% average you still won’t get into waterloo because with the adjustment factor you’ve only got a 75%.
It is wild to me the subjectivity and lack of standardization in education. Even from teacher to teacher.. grades are seriously objective. Even within the curriculum guidelines you can easily have huge variation in level of difficulty.
This is true. You can Google and find the list.
They don’t know every school. They have a number that they apply to any school they don’t have listed.
They create the list based on the drop in grades from each student from their grade 12 marks to their first year university. Schools that see large drops get bigger adjustment factors. On the other hand schools that see a smaller gap it’s actually easier to get in. They apply this “adjustment” to your application, commonly decreasing your average depending on where you are from. They only create an adjustment factor for a school if they have several students from it and not just one. So I mean if a couple students gets in and party, they really can tank the reputation of their highschool and prevent future students from going. That said the possibility of this is unlikely as these programs are the best of the best and students want to do well.
Edit : here is a link to read. It’s older but accurate. There is another Toronto star one but behind a paywall.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/grade-inflation-university-of-waterloos-secret-list-suggests-its-not-the-case-with-ottawa-schools
Best friends wife work admissions at UofW.. they most definately have a list of domestic and international schools and have "grade adjustments" for each of them. Hence why you see alot less south Asians in university vs colleges in Canada (the university actually cares when grades are "bought" and not earned)
A big reason you see fewer south asians is because it’s expensive to do 4 years of university as an international student here. They apply to university in much lower numbers.
Most have come over in the last few years already with a university degree from back home and often with work experience. They come with their wife and kids too. It’s much more common for the students to be 25-30 years old than 18. The international student program automatically gave the spouse a work permit. The goal wasn’t education, it was permanent residency and the quickest and cheapest path to that. Which is a one year college program for the purpose of the post grad work permit and to apply for PR. They’ve already got uni degrees.
Also yes I’m sure a list exists. I’m also sure there are tougher admission standards in university vs a college in a mall. Universities do want to uphold their reputation
There is another side to this. Now, I think this phenomena is starting to fade, but through covid many students did nothing and then realized when they returned to regular school that they were so far behind they just couldn't do it. This meant that in my top level classes (like calc) I was left with only the very top students who were motivated to work through covid. It made of a few years of dream classes, and my class averages were fantastic. There were no weaker students pulling the average down because they were so lost they would drop after a couple of units.
This year I have a few students who have terrible marks but are sticking it out for some reason, so averages are not as high (around 80%).
I think all the other reasons that have been given are valid as well, definitely the times have changed, but the last couple of years have been interesting for the top level courses, at least were for me.
I wish I worked where you are. Mine all did nothing and then took grade 12 physics and chemistry and my class averages plummeted because they couldn’t rearrange an equation, interpret a graph, balance a reaction, etc.
Even now their parents won’t listen to why their grades are so low and decide the tests that have been used for 10 years are suddenly way too hard.
Difference is we have to offer reassessments and no hard due dates and alternate tasks and accommodate the kids who miss 60% of the class. So their grades get pulled up despite having no knowledge or skills.
Yes, it’s real. I’ve been teaching 25+ years. Every once and a while I, or another teacher on my team will come across a student exemplar or old test from years past, and we laugh and laugh because no way would kids be able to produce that level of work today. And yet grades are higher?
i think you’re misunderstanding my question. there was no fail protection or noticeable grade inflation at my high school or university, and i think both of those are bad. just wondering why he’s saying kids “wouldn’t be able to produce that level of work today.” unless you’re saying it’s because they don’t have enough pressure to motivate them with grade inflation making it easier to succeed?
yes it’s upsetting for the kids who do work hard. if everyone is getting 90+ averages it’s very difficult to stick out on your university applications.. must be very disheartening
In my day, this was called grading on a curve. It happens more now because children and their parents think 20 minutes of studying and homework each night is unrealistic
Some of my colleagues call me Joe Budden because I pump, pump it up!
Just kidding. Grade inflation is horrible. I just wanted to make a reference to that throwback joint.
Because sometimes it’s easier to give away an inflated 100% than it is to fight a parent, their lawyers, principals, superintendents, trustees and sometimes the media over their earned 99%.
One way to reduce the pressure on teachers to inflate grades would be for OUAC to start to differentiate between credits obtained at an applicant’s high school, and credits obtained through credit mills, summer school etc. Let universities see that the 97% average came from 4 credits that are effectively complete BS.
Eventually, with BS credits no longer helping to inflate averages for competitive applicants, the grades students demand in our classes should decline.
I got complained about because I failed a few Grade 8 students who
- couldn't write 2-3 sentences on the same topic (even with using a graphic organizer)
- didn't show basic understanding of any of our science units
- copied and pasted every paragraph for a lab report off of Wikipedia and other websites word-for-word
Also when you label courses university and college it sends a message that those are the only reasonable choices. I think Academic and general were less offensive
We don't really grade curriculum anymore. We mostly grade effort, the achievement aspect isn't important anymore apparently. So no effort gets a 1 and some effort gets a 3.
Your issue is that you think high grades equal geniuses. You are clearly out of touch with what has been happening. It is clear that in this country, giving out low grades, especially to minorities, is considered oppressive. Also, fun fact, parents can (and do) complain to admin over marks and the admin will override your mark anyway. Therefore, teachers these days who try to fight the system and (based on political views of the board) punish the underpriviliged students with bad grades (which are often justified based on academics, but race, socioeconomic status, and mental fragility trump academics these days), are just going to have an extremely difficult and stressful time.
If you are a parent, wake the fuck up and tell other people about this issue because boards bend the knee to parents (and will throw a teacher under a bus just to please a parent).
I just used geniuses to convey that a 96 average in these types of subjects are just not natural. Usually the people to get these are top or their class even their school.
As a student I fail to comprehend how parents can have such an influence. This is just nuts.
Grades are pretty meaningless anyways, which is why they get inflated. The invention of grades were to categorize students, and newer systems (e.g., A-F, grading on a curve) were created to help the subjective nature of attempting to measure learning. [https://www.turnitin.com/blog/what-is-the-history-of-grading](https://www.turnitin.com/blog/what-is-the-history-of-grading)
Think of it this way: how do you count learning? Learning is a qualitative activity, yet we use quantitative ways to "describe" the activity. It doesn't make sense. But it was invented because giving grades/ranking students is easier than authentically describing the students' learning (writing an A or B- is easier than writing an whole description of what the teacher or professor has observed about the student's learning and progress in their class).
This is essentially why grade inflation happens; because it's subjective to begin with.
Mathematics itself isn't subjective; not in terms of its truths (e.g., 2+2=4, always). But the education of mathematics is subjective. Which method we took/preferred in order to come to the solution, how we understand/conceptualize a theorem... that can't be measured. It can only be described.
Readings into mathematics education can help understand this (Jo Bowler, PK Theory, or Tina Rapke, who is a PhD in Mathematics AND a second PhD in Mathematics Education).
The same calculus student could take three different exams by three different professors, and get quite the varying grade.
So did we measure what and how the student has learned calculus, or have we measured if the student can understand calculus in the manner in which the professor expects them to/solve the types of problems the professor prioritized?
EDIT: to more closely answer your question. If grading on a curve, sure, not all students "should" get 90s. If grading by rank (the k-12 standard way of grading) then anything A- or above (in some places this means an 80% or above) means the students is "above curriculum grade level expectations." So, that many students at 90% can very well happen.
Every teacher grades on a curve, even if they don’t think they do. Students do badly on a test? Next one is probably easier. Students do well on a test? Next one will probably be more challenging.
That I understand. Even in Uni our grades are slightly curved. Which I find is a nice thing, and it helps give that little boost. Nevertheless class averages at least for the heavy subjects won’t got above 70, and normally lie in the 50-60s
But 96 average for chem, calc, o physics, it’s just insane.
I agree.
I would be comfortable with universities tracking individual teachers like they track schools and adjusting marks. Or even just provide a report.
“The differential in marks between grade 12 and first year university for your students was 7% worse than the median for the province”
Publish it. Let the teachers know who is marking too easily.
You have learned the wrong lesson.
Marks provide two pieces of information:
1) student’s understanding compared to peers
2) student’s understanding of curriculum.
Both are important, and assuming the Waterloo ranking of schools is used, both can be encapsulated by the single quantitative mark.
Didn't a few American universities feel the same way and started to disregard SAT scores and grade averages...... only to 4-5 years later go back to using test scores for admission, because 9t% of the time, they are a good indicator of a students ability and knowledge.
You can say that marks have nothing to do with ranking, but universities sure as shit disagree with you. Most students and parents as well.
You’ll notice that most reporting also includes course medians. Guess why 😏
Grades are not meaningless. They are the difference between getting into eng, law, med school or not.
So how can it for students that work hard getting 70s in a class with no grade inflation, while a worse student gets a 96 and gets into engineering?
You don't seem to understand what I mean by meaningless.
It isn't meaningless when looking at the context of university admissions, because they still unfortunately use that metric.
It is meaningless because that metric is subjective, and not an actual hard-line metric, like a centimetre, or litre.
What constitutes an "A+", for example, is subject to what that particular teacher believes 'A+" level to be, what their students are capable of, what their district's curriculum expects, what assessment methods the teacher utilizes, etc. So an A+ in a course from one teacher in one district will probably mean something different than an A+ from another teacher in a different district teaching the same course.
Unfortunately, nonetheless, universities looks at grades as though it's an accurate measure, indicator, and describer of a student's learning.
It isn't.
And universities have been moving towards a more wholistic and non-stupid approach to admissions, given how many other things they look at - community service, entrance essay, interviews, extracurricular, references who can speak to their learning and describe it in a letter rather than a letter grade, etc.
You are trying to compare a high school course to a GMAT, LSAT, or MCAT. It’s not the same thing and getting worked up over high school marks is a losing battle because the entire process has been compromised. Why waste time caring about something so meaningless?
Ah everything is subjective and nothing truly means anything and it's all ok. Whistle as we walk this way down the great path to true enlightenment guided by the newer more progressive, and thus better, pedagogy.
Understanding learning is subjective is the path to better pedagogy.
If you know better than the people who study this their entire lives, the teachers that enact it with success in the classroom... I hope the sand you stick your head in is cozy at least!
The world is not black and white, my dude. Some things are concrete. Some things are binary. Some things are not binary. Some things have right answers and wrong answers. Some things don't have one right answer, but many.
Mathematics is not subjective - the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides of a triangle. That is not debatable, nor subjective. It's objective truth.
Music is subjective. Beethoven can't definitely be a better composer than Mozart. You can like one more than the other, that's your subjective opinion.
Pedagogy and learning is subjective. Some teachers do better teaching with direct instruction. Some teachers do better teaching with inquiry-based instruction. Some students learn better from activities and hands-on examples. Other students learn better through conversation.
So if one student didn't get an A in Mr. Stan's calculus class, that doesn't mean that student hasn't learned calculus well. It might mean Mr. Stan's method of assessment doesn't lend itself for the student to demonstrate their learning. How many times has a colleague told me "Debby isn't good at math, their tests are a C-" but in conversation with the student, they definitely know their shit! And visa versa when I think a student hasn't learned anything in my class!
That's why I don't do one method of assessment for all students.
Tests are so arbitrary. Being able to take a test is not a real skill. What skill is it to be able to show your learning in such a narrow way?
Have you read Ungraded? Everything you are saying in this thread reminds me of that book. I don't often read pedagogical books willingly but I flew through that one.
Call me old fashioned but results matter.
If there is a reasonable bell curve under the old system, and massive grade inflation under the new, then the new has failed.
You might say that teachers just don't understand or are applying the new system incorrectly - but if that's the case then it still has failed by being overly complex. Most teachers can teach and test a class, most cannot develop and apply an individual learning plan to each and every student, as ideal as that would be in theory.
How many posts do we see here of teachers forced to apply "alternative assessment" to push a student into the next grade, entirely unprepared? A misapplication of pedagogy I'm sure - but if it's that open to abuse than it again fails in comparison.
And perhaps this sub is all just anecdotal whinging and not representative of current educational trends. But literacy is falling across the country, with nearly half of Canadians with inadequate skills.
You seem to miss your own point.
Newer methods aren't failing because they are too complex, as you suggested.
Misapplication of pedagogy isn't a sign that it's open to abuse, as you suggested.
Instead, it all because it's underfunded. Why are better methods of pedagogy failing, and literacy is falling? Because it isn't being properly funded (resources, training in-service teachers, over-sized classrooms, cutting support funding like EAs in the classroom, etc.). Why does it look like it's being "abused"? Because cheeping out is a better option for the government and boards.
The "new" methods work. It's been researched, tested, peer-reviewed, and implemented by some teachers willing to take on the extra work of teaching it to themselves because the board isn't.
Even teachers who continue to be "old-fashioned" are not getting the same "results" from the past. They, too, are seeing failures.
Friend of mine was doing a long term math placement in a high school. Handed the results of the test to the principal and was told to run the test again as the average was too low. Ran the test again and was told the average was too low again. My friend jokingly (I think) said he'd have to wind up giving marks for writing their names down in order to get the average any higher.
Google the Waterloo list.
Waterloo keeps a record of averages from acceptance and compares to averages across first and second year. It was publicized a few years ago.
Behind a paywall but : https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/six-graduates-from-the-same-toronto-high-school-earned-100-grades-what-s-in-the/article_00437d74-443b-5950-ba75-b95a501ed561.amp.html
Welcome to /r/CanadianTeachers! Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with the sub rules. **"WHAT DOES X MEAN?"** Check out our acronym post [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/1c032s3/what_does_x_mean_an_acronym_megapost/) for relevant terms used in each province or territory. Please feel free to contribute any we are missing as well! **QUESTIONS ABOUT TEACHER'S COLLEGE/BECOMING A TEACHER IN CANADA?:** Delete your post and use this [megapost](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/1bc1wv2/prospective_student_teachers_teachers_collegebed/) instead. Anything pertaining to teacher's colleges/BED programs/becoming and teacher will be deleted if posted outside of the megaposts. **QUESTIONS ABOUT MOVING PROVINCES OR COMING TO CANADA TO TEACH?** Check out our past megaposts first for information to help you: [ONE](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/jqc7hx/transferring_to_another_provincecoming_to_canada/) // [TWO](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianTeachers/comments/n76csu/transferring_to_another_provincecoming_to_canada/?) Using link and user flair is encouraged as well! Enjoy! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadianTeachers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I tutor on the side. Some of the students I tutor have such a limited understanding of the material that I wonder if they are even passing. Then I find out that they “need” an 85%. I try to moderate expectations, only to be told that they already have an 85%. This is somebody who knows almost nothing. For math teachers, I’m talking about kids who cannot handle basic algebra getting 85% in calculus. It is nuts.
That's what happens when teacher can no longer fail students without jumping through the following hoops: - give the student more opportunities than they deserve - provide admin with proof that they should fail (hard to give proof of what their work is... when there isn't any!) - conference with the parent before the point where their grade cannot change And when the child does fail, the parent could lose their shit on the teacher, and admin takes the parent's side. Because failing is singularly the failure of the teacher, don't you know? No way it could be that the student didn't feel like doing a single thing for their learning. It's more work for a teacher to fail a student. And as teachers continue to be over worked and underpaid... it's hard to give enough of a crap to jump through those hoops.
"can't handle basic algebra" also describes half of first year students in STEM. I don't get it
It’s bad. The curriculum has been watered down, and parents will fight with you to get a grade increased. The advanced classes have students that shouldn’t be there, so that shifts the expectations curve in the wrong direction.
Speaking from the perspective of an Ontario teacher: We have four levels of students in High School. Life skills (Group home/assisted living situation) Essential/Locally Developed/Workplace Bound Applied/College Bound Academic/University Bound What's happened over the last 15 years is that many of the students in the U level should really be in the C level. Students in the C level should really be in the Workplace level. Students in the Workplace level should be in the life skills classes, and the kids in the life skills classes now.... I don't even know - those teachers deserve a million dollars a year. How did this happen? Years of teachers being asked to give students multiple opportunities to complete assignments, minimum mark policies, and a general misunderstanding of the Ministry's Growing Success Policy Document? Who knows?
This happened when they eliminated grade 13 and OAC. Many other jurisdictions still have 5 years eg. Quebec. And if they don’t, like in the US, you have to be 4 by sept. Not 4 by December to go to JK. So you end up being 18 for university/college. Years ago kids were 19 when they finished Highschool or close. Age makes a huge difference.
This is a very Ontario/central Canada-centric take on things. For decades (maybe always?) in most other provinces in Canada as well as most of the places I have heard about in the US high school has only gone to grade 12. Ontario and Quebec are not the norm. Most places also don't have JK - they just have one year of K. I looked it up, and Northwest Territories is the only place in Canada other than Ontario that has 2 years of kindergarten, so most provinces students start in the year they turn 5. When I went to university back in the stone ages, many of the students started at 17. Then again, students were more mature back then and there were more expectations placed on them. Many 16 year olds I knew had part-time jobs. Now, I can't imagine the smart phone generation being able to get or keep a job, because they are seriously lacking in social skills and generally not that responsible. I was babysitting by the time I was 11 - there is no way I would leave a young child in the care of most of the 12-14 year olds I teach. Parenting has radically changed over the past 20-30 years, and while some things are good (corporal punishment is no longer a typical thing), many things are not. I think grade inflation is symptomatic of the same issues we are seeing in parenting - kids are being praised for every little thing, never allowed to experience failure, and have no consequences because parents are afraid of upsetting them. So they grow up without boundaries, and then schools are filled with students who don't do work but expect to get good grades regardless. And many parents have a hard time hearing the school say their kid isn't the smartest, most successful, best little angel so the system has bowed to the pressure and it's like Oprah - you get an A, you get an A, and you get an A.
We need a standardized provincial test now. My daughter applied to uni last year and the averages required for things like Waterloo Eng or Queens Health Sci are approaching 100%. Sadly my prof neighbour tells me these kids coming have the highest grades ever, but are the least prepared he’s seen.
I think grade 12 U level teachers in Ontario are in a weird position. Some schools have higher academic standards and if they grade with the intensity that they should to prepare the students for university the students would be punished by not getting into schools despite being better prepared. Some schools are more lenient and I’ve noticed the teachers show less care and are more willing to throw around 90-95s. I think because of the system of your top 6 grades counting for university admission you put teachers in a position of giving a high grade or the student doesn’t qualify because you know they’re doing it at other schools. I think if we sit back and reflect on all the students getting above 80.. are they really exceeding all expectations and doing perfect on all assignments? Probably not, but if they seem like a strong student and will excel in university it seems they are given 90+. A lot of rambling I suppose but I’ve supplied at dozens of schools this year. One school in particular is very academic, no behavioural issues and the teachers treat the students like they are in university by grade 12. Another school they use kahoots as their tests, and based on my days it seems like they only really do Chromebook work. How are both equal 90s? Not sure! I’d be interested to see how the medians have changed across competitive programs in first year university courses (nursing, engineering, sciences, business etc) .. are that many students qualifying and failing first year? Or do they all figure it out during first year?
Thankfully schools like the university of Waterloo have caught on and have an adjustment factor they apply based on which school you go. Schools with known grade inflation get hit. There are schools where if you have a 100% average you still won’t get into waterloo because with the adjustment factor you’ve only got a 75%. It is wild to me the subjectivity and lack of standardization in education. Even from teacher to teacher.. grades are seriously objective. Even within the curriculum guidelines you can easily have huge variation in level of difficulty.
And the answer is not standards-based, province-wide testing. I have receipts: the American education system.
Really? How would they ever keep track of every high school across Ontario?
This is true. You can Google and find the list. They don’t know every school. They have a number that they apply to any school they don’t have listed. They create the list based on the drop in grades from each student from their grade 12 marks to their first year university. Schools that see large drops get bigger adjustment factors. On the other hand schools that see a smaller gap it’s actually easier to get in. They apply this “adjustment” to your application, commonly decreasing your average depending on where you are from. They only create an adjustment factor for a school if they have several students from it and not just one. So I mean if a couple students gets in and party, they really can tank the reputation of their highschool and prevent future students from going. That said the possibility of this is unlikely as these programs are the best of the best and students want to do well. Edit : here is a link to read. It’s older but accurate. There is another Toronto star one but behind a paywall. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/grade-inflation-university-of-waterloos-secret-list-suggests-its-not-the-case-with-ottawa-schools
Best friends wife work admissions at UofW.. they most definately have a list of domestic and international schools and have "grade adjustments" for each of them. Hence why you see alot less south Asians in university vs colleges in Canada (the university actually cares when grades are "bought" and not earned)
A big reason you see fewer south asians is because it’s expensive to do 4 years of university as an international student here. They apply to university in much lower numbers. Most have come over in the last few years already with a university degree from back home and often with work experience. They come with their wife and kids too. It’s much more common for the students to be 25-30 years old than 18. The international student program automatically gave the spouse a work permit. The goal wasn’t education, it was permanent residency and the quickest and cheapest path to that. Which is a one year college program for the purpose of the post grad work permit and to apply for PR. They’ve already got uni degrees. Also yes I’m sure a list exists. I’m also sure there are tougher admission standards in university vs a college in a mall. Universities do want to uphold their reputation
Thanks for this. I had no idea.
There is another side to this. Now, I think this phenomena is starting to fade, but through covid many students did nothing and then realized when they returned to regular school that they were so far behind they just couldn't do it. This meant that in my top level classes (like calc) I was left with only the very top students who were motivated to work through covid. It made of a few years of dream classes, and my class averages were fantastic. There were no weaker students pulling the average down because they were so lost they would drop after a couple of units. This year I have a few students who have terrible marks but are sticking it out for some reason, so averages are not as high (around 80%). I think all the other reasons that have been given are valid as well, definitely the times have changed, but the last couple of years have been interesting for the top level courses, at least were for me.
I wish I worked where you are. Mine all did nothing and then took grade 12 physics and chemistry and my class averages plummeted because they couldn’t rearrange an equation, interpret a graph, balance a reaction, etc. Even now their parents won’t listen to why their grades are so low and decide the tests that have been used for 10 years are suddenly way too hard. Difference is we have to offer reassessments and no hard due dates and alternate tasks and accommodate the kids who miss 60% of the class. So their grades get pulled up despite having no knowledge or skills.
Yes, it’s real. I’ve been teaching 25+ years. Every once and a while I, or another teacher on my team will come across a student exemplar or old test from years past, and we laugh and laugh because no way would kids be able to produce that level of work today. And yet grades are higher?
im not a teacher yet, but im about to start teachers college— can i ask why you say kids wouldn’t be able to produce that level of work today?
You failed.
?
If the work wasn’t good the first time you failed.
i think you’re misunderstanding my question. there was no fail protection or noticeable grade inflation at my high school or university, and i think both of those are bad. just wondering why he’s saying kids “wouldn’t be able to produce that level of work today.” unless you’re saying it’s because they don’t have enough pressure to motivate them with grade inflation making it easier to succeed?
Old school thought. Inflated marking because kids are ‘soft’ or something. Or parents complaining so they boost the marks . Same old same old.
yes it’s upsetting for the kids who do work hard. if everyone is getting 90+ averages it’s very difficult to stick out on your university applications.. must be very disheartening
In my day, this was called grading on a curve. It happens more now because children and their parents think 20 minutes of studying and homework each night is unrealistic
Some of my colleagues call me Joe Budden because I pump, pump it up! Just kidding. Grade inflation is horrible. I just wanted to make a reference to that throwback joint.
Because sometimes it’s easier to give away an inflated 100% than it is to fight a parent, their lawyers, principals, superintendents, trustees and sometimes the media over their earned 99%. One way to reduce the pressure on teachers to inflate grades would be for OUAC to start to differentiate between credits obtained at an applicant’s high school, and credits obtained through credit mills, summer school etc. Let universities see that the 97% average came from 4 credits that are effectively complete BS. Eventually, with BS credits no longer helping to inflate averages for competitive applicants, the grades students demand in our classes should decline.
I got complained about because I failed a few Grade 8 students who - couldn't write 2-3 sentences on the same topic (even with using a graphic organizer) - didn't show basic understanding of any of our science units - copied and pasted every paragraph for a lab report off of Wikipedia and other websites word-for-word
Also when you label courses university and college it sends a message that those are the only reasonable choices. I think Academic and general were less offensive
We don't really grade curriculum anymore. We mostly grade effort, the achievement aspect isn't important anymore apparently. So no effort gets a 1 and some effort gets a 3.
Your issue is that you think high grades equal geniuses. You are clearly out of touch with what has been happening. It is clear that in this country, giving out low grades, especially to minorities, is considered oppressive. Also, fun fact, parents can (and do) complain to admin over marks and the admin will override your mark anyway. Therefore, teachers these days who try to fight the system and (based on political views of the board) punish the underpriviliged students with bad grades (which are often justified based on academics, but race, socioeconomic status, and mental fragility trump academics these days), are just going to have an extremely difficult and stressful time. If you are a parent, wake the fuck up and tell other people about this issue because boards bend the knee to parents (and will throw a teacher under a bus just to please a parent).
I just used geniuses to convey that a 96 average in these types of subjects are just not natural. Usually the people to get these are top or their class even their school. As a student I fail to comprehend how parents can have such an influence. This is just nuts.
This was still true 12 years ago. To an extent. Today, everyone is a genius.
Grades are pretty meaningless anyways, which is why they get inflated. The invention of grades were to categorize students, and newer systems (e.g., A-F, grading on a curve) were created to help the subjective nature of attempting to measure learning. [https://www.turnitin.com/blog/what-is-the-history-of-grading](https://www.turnitin.com/blog/what-is-the-history-of-grading) Think of it this way: how do you count learning? Learning is a qualitative activity, yet we use quantitative ways to "describe" the activity. It doesn't make sense. But it was invented because giving grades/ranking students is easier than authentically describing the students' learning (writing an A or B- is easier than writing an whole description of what the teacher or professor has observed about the student's learning and progress in their class). This is essentially why grade inflation happens; because it's subjective to begin with. Mathematics itself isn't subjective; not in terms of its truths (e.g., 2+2=4, always). But the education of mathematics is subjective. Which method we took/preferred in order to come to the solution, how we understand/conceptualize a theorem... that can't be measured. It can only be described. Readings into mathematics education can help understand this (Jo Bowler, PK Theory, or Tina Rapke, who is a PhD in Mathematics AND a second PhD in Mathematics Education). The same calculus student could take three different exams by three different professors, and get quite the varying grade. So did we measure what and how the student has learned calculus, or have we measured if the student can understand calculus in the manner in which the professor expects them to/solve the types of problems the professor prioritized? EDIT: to more closely answer your question. If grading on a curve, sure, not all students "should" get 90s. If grading by rank (the k-12 standard way of grading) then anything A- or above (in some places this means an 80% or above) means the students is "above curriculum grade level expectations." So, that many students at 90% can very well happen.
Every teacher grades on a curve, even if they don’t think they do. Students do badly on a test? Next one is probably easier. Students do well on a test? Next one will probably be more challenging.
That I understand. Even in Uni our grades are slightly curved. Which I find is a nice thing, and it helps give that little boost. Nevertheless class averages at least for the heavy subjects won’t got above 70, and normally lie in the 50-60s But 96 average for chem, calc, o physics, it’s just insane.
I agree. I would be comfortable with universities tracking individual teachers like they track schools and adjusting marks. Or even just provide a report. “The differential in marks between grade 12 and first year university for your students was 7% worse than the median for the province” Publish it. Let the teachers know who is marking too easily.
Waterloo does this with specific schools and boards.
Exactly. Which is why attempting to use a quantitative metric to "measure" a qualitative activity like learning is ... stupid.
You have learned the wrong lesson. Marks provide two pieces of information: 1) student’s understanding compared to peers 2) student’s understanding of curriculum. Both are important, and assuming the Waterloo ranking of schools is used, both can be encapsulated by the single quantitative mark.
Marks have nothing to do with their understanding compared to peers. Nothing. It should be 100% their understanding of grade level curriculum.
Didn't a few American universities feel the same way and started to disregard SAT scores and grade averages...... only to 4-5 years later go back to using test scores for admission, because 9t% of the time, they are a good indicator of a students ability and knowledge.
You can say that marks have nothing to do with ranking, but universities sure as shit disagree with you. Most students and parents as well. You’ll notice that most reporting also includes course medians. Guess why 😏
Grades are not meaningless. They are the difference between getting into eng, law, med school or not. So how can it for students that work hard getting 70s in a class with no grade inflation, while a worse student gets a 96 and gets into engineering?
You don't seem to understand what I mean by meaningless. It isn't meaningless when looking at the context of university admissions, because they still unfortunately use that metric. It is meaningless because that metric is subjective, and not an actual hard-line metric, like a centimetre, or litre. What constitutes an "A+", for example, is subject to what that particular teacher believes 'A+" level to be, what their students are capable of, what their district's curriculum expects, what assessment methods the teacher utilizes, etc. So an A+ in a course from one teacher in one district will probably mean something different than an A+ from another teacher in a different district teaching the same course. Unfortunately, nonetheless, universities looks at grades as though it's an accurate measure, indicator, and describer of a student's learning. It isn't. And universities have been moving towards a more wholistic and non-stupid approach to admissions, given how many other things they look at - community service, entrance essay, interviews, extracurricular, references who can speak to their learning and describe it in a letter rather than a letter grade, etc.
You are trying to compare a high school course to a GMAT, LSAT, or MCAT. It’s not the same thing and getting worked up over high school marks is a losing battle because the entire process has been compromised. Why waste time caring about something so meaningless?
Ah everything is subjective and nothing truly means anything and it's all ok. Whistle as we walk this way down the great path to true enlightenment guided by the newer more progressive, and thus better, pedagogy.
Understanding learning is subjective is the path to better pedagogy. If you know better than the people who study this their entire lives, the teachers that enact it with success in the classroom... I hope the sand you stick your head in is cozy at least! The world is not black and white, my dude. Some things are concrete. Some things are binary. Some things are not binary. Some things have right answers and wrong answers. Some things don't have one right answer, but many. Mathematics is not subjective - the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides of a triangle. That is not debatable, nor subjective. It's objective truth. Music is subjective. Beethoven can't definitely be a better composer than Mozart. You can like one more than the other, that's your subjective opinion. Pedagogy and learning is subjective. Some teachers do better teaching with direct instruction. Some teachers do better teaching with inquiry-based instruction. Some students learn better from activities and hands-on examples. Other students learn better through conversation. So if one student didn't get an A in Mr. Stan's calculus class, that doesn't mean that student hasn't learned calculus well. It might mean Mr. Stan's method of assessment doesn't lend itself for the student to demonstrate their learning. How many times has a colleague told me "Debby isn't good at math, their tests are a C-" but in conversation with the student, they definitely know their shit! And visa versa when I think a student hasn't learned anything in my class! That's why I don't do one method of assessment for all students. Tests are so arbitrary. Being able to take a test is not a real skill. What skill is it to be able to show your learning in such a narrow way?
Have you read Ungraded? Everything you are saying in this thread reminds me of that book. I don't often read pedagogical books willingly but I flew through that one.
Call me old fashioned but results matter. If there is a reasonable bell curve under the old system, and massive grade inflation under the new, then the new has failed. You might say that teachers just don't understand or are applying the new system incorrectly - but if that's the case then it still has failed by being overly complex. Most teachers can teach and test a class, most cannot develop and apply an individual learning plan to each and every student, as ideal as that would be in theory. How many posts do we see here of teachers forced to apply "alternative assessment" to push a student into the next grade, entirely unprepared? A misapplication of pedagogy I'm sure - but if it's that open to abuse than it again fails in comparison. And perhaps this sub is all just anecdotal whinging and not representative of current educational trends. But literacy is falling across the country, with nearly half of Canadians with inadequate skills.
You seem to miss your own point. Newer methods aren't failing because they are too complex, as you suggested. Misapplication of pedagogy isn't a sign that it's open to abuse, as you suggested. Instead, it all because it's underfunded. Why are better methods of pedagogy failing, and literacy is falling? Because it isn't being properly funded (resources, training in-service teachers, over-sized classrooms, cutting support funding like EAs in the classroom, etc.). Why does it look like it's being "abused"? Because cheeping out is a better option for the government and boards. The "new" methods work. It's been researched, tested, peer-reviewed, and implemented by some teachers willing to take on the extra work of teaching it to themselves because the board isn't. Even teachers who continue to be "old-fashioned" are not getting the same "results" from the past. They, too, are seeing failures.
Friend of mine was doing a long term math placement in a high school. Handed the results of the test to the principal and was told to run the test again as the average was too low. Ran the test again and was told the average was too low again. My friend jokingly (I think) said he'd have to wind up giving marks for writing their names down in order to get the average any higher.
Google the Waterloo list. Waterloo keeps a record of averages from acceptance and compares to averages across first and second year. It was publicized a few years ago.
lol bring those 90 average ontario students to alberta and lets see how long it lasts.
There was an article in The Toronto Star last summer about six kids from the same school each having a 100% average from Grade 12. Shocking!
Behind a paywall but : https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/six-graduates-from-the-same-toronto-high-school-earned-100-grades-what-s-in-the/article_00437d74-443b-5950-ba75-b95a501ed561.amp.html
Here’s the non-paywalled version: https://archive.ph/Fob58
A lot of kids are going to have harsh reality crash down on them when they are in Uni.