I was finishing up 3rd quarter grades this morning (woo hoo for 4th quarter!) and was noticing the large number of missing assignments from my three Math 3 classes. And yet nearly not as many in my Honors Precalc classes.
Here are the numbers:
In CP Math 3: total of 220 missing assignments for 78 students = 2.82 per student
In Honors Precalc: total of 37 missing assignments for 48 students = 0.77 per student
I know there are a lot of factors that go into this.
For me really boils down to a student determining if it's worth their time to complete practice problems. I don't give a lot of problems; my Math 3 assignments are typically around 5 problems (maximum 10, I'd say) and Precalc is more than that. This shows the amount of effort someone is willing to put in to be successful.
Another big factor in success is attendance. And again, there's quite a big difference in those numbers.
In CP Math 3, the average number of days missed during the 3rd quarter is 2.58
In Honors Precalc, the average number of days missed during the 3rd quarter is 1.63
This doesn't take discern between regular absences and field trips; the precalc kids are the ones more likely to miss because of a school activity. So their number would probably be quite a bit lower.
I tweeted out these numbers and Robin Mathews (@romathio) responded.
I hadn't even thought about tracking, which I think separates the students based on ability.
So herein lies my new quandry.
Is tracking helpful because students have shown that they're going to perform thusly? Or do they perform this way because they're tracked?
Which came first? The chicken or the egg?
(And just 8 more days til spring break. But who's counting?)
Here are the numbers:
In CP Math 3: total of 220 missing assignments for 78 students = 2.82 per student
In Honors Precalc: total of 37 missing assignments for 48 students = 0.77 per student
I know there are a lot of factors that go into this.
For me really boils down to a student determining if it's worth their time to complete practice problems. I don't give a lot of problems; my Math 3 assignments are typically around 5 problems (maximum 10, I'd say) and Precalc is more than that. This shows the amount of effort someone is willing to put in to be successful.
Another big factor in success is attendance. And again, there's quite a big difference in those numbers.
In CP Math 3, the average number of days missed during the 3rd quarter is 2.58
In Honors Precalc, the average number of days missed during the 3rd quarter is 1.63
This doesn't take discern between regular absences and field trips; the precalc kids are the ones more likely to miss because of a school activity. So their number would probably be quite a bit lower.
I tweeted out these numbers and Robin Mathews (@romathio) responded.
@Fouss another reason I'm for getting rid of tracking...— Robin Mathews (@romathio) March 28, 2017
I hadn't even thought about tracking, which I think separates the students based on ability.
So herein lies my new quandry.
Is tracking helpful because students have shown that they're going to perform thusly? Or do they perform this way because they're tracked?
Which came first? The chicken or the egg?
(And just 8 more days til spring break. But who's counting?)
Comments
Post a Comment