The Dallas school district has some new rules for teachers: New Rules (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-DISDgrades_15met.ART.State.Edition2.4d95d34.html)

For example, the new rules require teachers to accept late work and prevent them from penalizing students for missed deadlines. Homework grades that would drag down a student's overall average will be thrown out.
...
District records state that the changes are part of a switch to "effort-based" grading and are designed to give students multiple opportunities to demonstrate that they've mastered class material. Requiring teachers to contact parents instead of awarding zeros is designed to increase home-school communications, according to district materials presented recently to principals. Retests and deadline extensions are meant to motivate students to do better after initial failure.
...
Last school year, Dallas' board of trustees reaffirmed a policy that prevented teachers from giving students a grade lower than a 50 in any one grading period. The reason given was that students who fall below 50 have no hope or motivation to bring up their grades and just give up.

I don't see it in this article, but another rule supposedly requires a teacher that fails too many students to come up with a professional development plan, because obviously the teacher is to blame for students not showing up to learn.

Jesus Christ, I had clicked off of this thread to read others, and I had a delayed double take and had to come back here to make sure the linked article wasn't satire. This policy is that bad.

Being someone who literally missed just about every deadline imaginable in high school, I can safely say pushing it back won't have much of an impact. Kids either do the work or they don't. Although, contacting parents about zeros isn't a bad idea. I got a good laugh out of preventing teachers from giving final grades lower than a 50...as if the numerical value shows up on a transcript?

I think the school is more worried about putting up the appearance that students are doing better then actually helping them.

I imagine the outcry from this being reported with have them revert back to sanity.

This is to be expected when you tie the school's funding to student performance.

This is to be expected when you tie the school's funding to student performance.

Um...don't be embarrased to admit who funded yer education.
But make sure and correctly spell The Salvation Army.
Okey Dokey !

This is to be expected when you tie the school's funding to student performance.

Agreed. I also suspect the superintendent's bonus is tied to student performance.

Lionel, how are the suburbs compared to that district? Really, maybe I wasn't penalized enough in school, the reason I don't understand what you mean.

The Dallas ...

Along about 1995 or so I became aware that Army basic trainees were being issued "time-out" cards to give to their drill sergeants in times of extreem stress. This would allow the trainee to take a break from the harsh realities of basic combat training. I wondered if the Marines or Navy were doing the same thing, and figured the Army had gotten the idea from the Air Force.

This latest from plastik-fantastik Dal-Asssss is no real surprise. Disturbing, unrealistic and coddling, but no surprise.

Like the time-out cards, how in the hell does this help to prepare a youngster for life in the real world? What a disservice to the taxpayers.

Lionel, how are the suburbs compared to that district? Really, maybe I wasn't penalized enough in school, the reason I don't understand what you mean.

Most suburbs have schools that far exceed the quality of those in the urban areas. To be fair, I think it has a lot more to do with the parents giving a damn about their kids than it does with the quality of the teachers or facilities or anything like that. Anyway, suburban schools don't have to come up with such ruinous ideas in order to prop up their graduation statistics.

I think that's wrong, Lionel. Most low-income parents care about their children's education. The main difference I see from living in a community that ranks #1 in the state on education is that the vast majority of parents here are college educated. Sure, they may expect more out of their kids and know first-hand how education can benefit your life. But poor parents care just as much and probably try even harder to have their children be the first-generation of their family who attends college.

The difference I see isn't about suburban parents "giving a damn" and parents in poorer communities not - as you say -- but it's about the following:

College educated parents usually have the ability to help their children with school work or hire a tutor.

Those in affluent towns aren't worried about getting dinner that night, crime or getting a job to help support their family...thus they can focus on school work since their basic needs are taken care of (food, shelter and safety).

And yes, I do think teachers in poor communities DO get lazy. In college educated towns teachers are held to a high standard. If they don't teach current and factual information, teach course work that prepares students for college or are lazy with getting back graded work you can except parents will be all over it. Parents in educated, affluent communities have the luxury of time to deal with these teachers and trust me, the parents teachers deal with are generally more educated than them and aren't going to back down.

Parents in poor communities aren't breathing down the necks of teachers and usually don't have the educational background to challenge a teacher. Granted, there are advantages to working in educated communities -- less gang activity and violence etc. But teachers are apart of the problem in poor communities, in my opinion. I think they believe they can get away with shit because no one knows any different and people don't have the time or information/educational background to challenge and expect more out of them.

My Mom use to teach in a poor coastal town before she had kids and she told me that she never had parents who felt comfortable challenging what she was doing, didn't have the time to (hardly any parents even showed up to their kids conferences because of work) and that she knew of many teachers who took advantage of that. These measures may not be the right way to deal with this issue, but I think something needs to be done to hold teachers accountable in towns where parents can't.

Thanks Lionel, but I think the parents in urban communities do give a damn.

I also think Overdose's post makes a lot of sense.

I'll backtrack a little on that - I was a might overbroad. In fact, my wife is the product of an urban school district widely regarded as being pretty sucky and she turned out fine - because her parents did give a damn (neither is college educated - I don't think that plays into things too much). Anyway, perhaps "inner city" might have been a better description than "urban." But in these school, the percentage of students whose parents (or more likely - parent) don't make sure their kid gets to school, don't make sure their kid does homework, don't go to parent teacher conferences, etc. is far too high. Resulting in urban school districts coming up with silly rules like these, and screwing up the educations of the kids that are there too learn.

This is to be expected when you tie the school's funding to student performance.

Couldn't have said it better myself, and I have a bit of an inside perspective, being in the education field and all. Good post dharm.

I definitely agree with dharm and Decka on this one... Less funding punishes school districts that "don't perform", but it can't help them do better!

but it can't help them do better!

True, but I really don't think more money helps them do better either.