There has been a societal shift in how we deal with children and failure. From every participant in sport getting a trophy no matter what, to schools implementing a no fail policy, children are now cushioned from failure in a way that previous generations have not been. Despite the desire to keep children self-esteem high by not giving them failing grades, this is an injustice for the child since they never learn how to fail and then try again. In fact, it would be for the students benefit to do away with no-fail policies within the school system. Ultimately, the no-fail system is bringing down students who normally do well, and creating a generation of people who have no sense of consequences for their lack of work ethic.
Those in support of the no-zero policy feel that if students receive zeroes they will lose motivation because they will know that cannot pass (Gabel, n.p.). With the no-zero policy, if a student misses a deadline or does not attempt to do an assignment they cannot receive a zero. While the supporter’s theory may seem to hold some merit, it is problematical in its implementation. While there are always a few students who do not attempt to do work or turn work in on time, lack of consequences for not doing work causes even more students to lose motivation. Mike Tachynski, who teaches at Ross Sheppard High School, has begun to give zeroes to students despite school policy (Smusiak, n.p.). In two months of using the no-zero policy, Tachynski had only had two students ask to make up assignments; after just a few weeks of ignoring the policy and giving out zeroes 27 students have asked about making up assignments they missed (Smusiak, n.p.). If this serves as any example, the possibility of receiving a failing grade like a zero is a motivating factor for the majority of students. Most people want to succeed, and a student’s measure of success is their grades. It is not surprising that the threat of zero grades would motivate students to do assignments so they can be successful.
Another issue with granting a passing grade to a student who did not truly pass is that they are unprepared for the next step; college. First of all, no college professor allows their students to miss deadline without either receiving a zero, or at minimum having a big portion of their grade docked. While the students may have passed through high school, they are going to get into college and fail. Dominic Cardy has noted that students are coming out of high school and having to take remedial courses in both reading and math in order to catch up to college level ("No-Fail Policy In Schools Needs Rewriting Argues NDP", n.p.). In other words, the no-zero policy may give students a short-term sense of faux accomplishment, it will set them up for failure once they pursue higher education.
It is not just student’s college experience which is at risk, but their actions at work as well. Not only are employers already complaining about a lack of skills in the latest workforce wave, they are fearing the future of what is coming. Wayne Vanwyck wrote an article for The Achievement Center outlining the issues there will be to find future sales people. He submits the following questions to his readers, and then asks if these people would maintain employment:
-If you submit a document two weeks after the deadline what should the consequences be?
-Does a salesperson receive commission on sales they “almost got”?
-Should a proposal with multiple spelling and grammatical errors be accepted?
-If you grossly underbid a job who should cover the losses? (Vanwyck, n.p.)
Despite the obvious answer that these employees would soon lose their jobs, the no-zero policy is teaching students they can do the student equivalent and still pass.
Another issue with the no-zero policy is the effect it has on mid-range students. This policy is a one size fits all policy that is supposed to help low achieving students feel more motivated to do better. People naturally live up to, or down to, the expectations placed upon them. While low-performing students are already low performing, mid-range students are being pulled down by this policy since they no longer have to worry about receiving zero grades. Unfortunately, this is dumbing down the school system with what seems to be little reward. In Grand Rapids, Michigan, students are given an “H” grade versus an “F” (Miller, n.p.). The “H” stands for held and means the student will just have to repeat that specific class the following semester (Miller, n.p.). This sounds like it would be effective, but only 16% of those with an “H” grade go on to get a passing grade the following semester (Miller, n.p.). That is a relatively low percentage, especially since these students have already been through the material and should improve the second time.
This change in the educational system is part of a growing trend of dumbing schools down to incorporate the lowest performing students, versus raising expectations so the majority of children can improve. The reason so many want to create an easy one size fits all solution is because of many factors. First of all, teachers often have too many students in their classrooms, so giving individualized attention to struggling students is almost an impossibility. Second, school funding is nowhere near where it should be to accommodate special tutoring or programs for students who struggle. So instead of finding real, long-term, solutions, easy to implement but questionable policies are enacted. As a result, all students are going to suffer.
There is little doubt that the education system is in serious peril. Major changes are needed. Nonetheless, the no-fail policies are not the way to fi the education system. Michael Petrelli, a research fellow at Stanford, sums it up well, saying, “If you're getting a zero, that usually means you didn't turn in the assignment or do the job correctly. All this does is create cynicism among educators and send signals to students that the education system is not serious about achievement” (Miller, n.p.). Instead of helping more students actually succeed, we are simply creating the illusion of success. This illusion will not serve the students well after graduation, when they either go to University and/or enter the working world where not doing tasks on time or well has real, long-term consequences. Unfortunately, it is adults with no sense of consequences who the school system is trying to create, to the detriment of society as a whole.
Works Cited
Gabel, Todd. "No-Zero Policy: A Failure Of One-Size-Fits-All Education Reform". Fraser Institute. N.p., 2015. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
Miller, Joshua. "Are 'No-Fail' Grading Systems Hurting Or Helping Students? | Fox News". Fox News. N.p., 2009. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
"No-Fail Policy In Schools Needs Rewriting Argues NDP". Cbc.ca. N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
Smusiak, Cara. "Why Schools Need To Scrap The No-Zero Policy". Canadian Family. N.p., 2012. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
Vanwyck, Wayne. "The No-Zero Policy – Setting Sales Expectations | The Achievement Centre Knowledgebase". Tac-focus.com. N.p., 2013. Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
