I negate "Grading systems in middle school should be abolished.

"

Round 1 will be for acceptance and definitions, debate will begin in Round 2.

I define "grading systems" as "standardized measures of varying levels of

comprehension within a subject area". "Middle school" is defined as "the levels of
schooling in grades 6, 7, and 8". "Abolished" is defined as "formally put an end
to."

I thank my opponent for accepting, and I look forward to a good debate.

I accept the debate, and also look forward to it. I affirm "Grading systems in
middle school should be abolished."

Grading systems provide a standardized way of communicating and determining

how much a student has learned or knows. Grades are based upon factors such as
scores on tests or completion of homework, and therefore grades can be used as
qualifications for entrance into particular classes or as an admission requirement for
college. Colleges tend to use GPA as a factor in admission, and the greater
the average GPA of admitted students at a college is, the lower the percent of
applications that are accepted is[1]. Having a grading system in middle school
prepares students for the grading systems in high school, which are an important
part in college acceptance.

Grades motivate students. According to a paper written by the University of

Southern California, extrinsic motivation, or motivation that comes from the
external environment, is "quite helpful in furthering student learning." Extrinsic
motivation comes "with the anticipation of rewards - grades... or some other
incentive."[2]. Therefore, grades act as a motivation for students to work harder.

Grades give students feedback about their progress and achievement, because if a
student knows their current grade, they have a factor that they can use to judge
their improvement. The purpose of a report card or a progress report is to allow a
student to see how much they've progressed, and how much more there is to
accomplish and improve in. Grading gives students this opportunity.

Grades provide guidance for teachers for instructional planning. If teachers look
at grades of their students and can see them struggling, the teacher can then make
modifications to the way they teach in order to maximize student performance.

For these preceding reasons, grading systems in middle school are good and
should not be abolished.

My first contention is that kids are more focused on getting good grades then
actually learning. If a teacher gives criteria for a certain assignment, many kids
will simply do exactly what is required to get what they consider "good grades".
By doing this, they aren't really learning anything, since there is no incentive for
doing anything else "extra", also known as learning more then what's required.
Many teachers will accept extra credit, but this really does not allow kids to
learn anything else because they're interested, it is simply another way to increase
that all-important grade. "The book suggests that by giving grades beginning in
early education, we teach children that learning for knowledge is not necessary,
and all that is needed are the skills to pass tests and play the game the teacher is
playing." ~Ted Montgomery, after reading "This Book is Not
Required."
My second contention is that grades cause bad self-esteem and unnecessary stress.
When a kid sees a huge red F on a paper they put effort into, even if it was a
last-minute effort, they feel disappointed and worried about how they're parents will
react. This causes a lot of stress and a decline of self-esteem. Also, the kids that
really, really care about doing well, and getting full credit on every assignment
spend so much time and effort striving for this that they experience a LOT of
unnecessary stress. By abolishing the standardized grading system, we are
talking a lot of stress off of every kid, whether they are a procrastinator, or just
spend way too much time doing schoolwork for that coveted grade. This middle
school English teacher agrees "It makes them afraid to ask questions (because
the system penalizes not-knowing), afraid to work things out by trial and error,
and -- worst of all -- afraid to express unpopular opinions. None of this is what
real learning is all about. Learning is messy. It involves taking risks and
making mistakes. It requires you to admit your ignorance at times. But by the
time most students reach college age, they have already decided that questions and
experiments are dangerous, and the safest course is to memorize, repeat, and tuck
everything into a neat plastic binder."
My third contention is that kids need more specialized feedback. By handing
them back a paper with a big red letter on the top, we are saying "Here, you fall
into this category." Teachers simply use grades as a time-saver in middle school.
Without them, teachers would still need to give kids feedback, but it would be
more in a written-evaluation form, which is better for kids in the long run, because
it gives them a more specific evaluation, especially during middle school, where kids
are beginning to really learn and develop and discover their strengths. Yes,
standardized tests are useful in college and high school, because they can determine
whether you get into certain classes, but at least for middle school, it would be
better for the kids if the grading system was abolished. By having a teacher take
the time to really think about each individual student, and write, say, a paragraph
about them every once in a while, detailing what they're doing well, and what they
need to improve upon, it will make a much bigger impact.

Now I'll refute my opponent's arguments:

1. My opponent's first argument was that grades provide preparation for the
grading system in high school and college. "Having a standardized way of
communicating how much a student learns or knows" is not as necessary in middle
school as it is later on. Middle school should be a time for focusing on students'
strengths and weaknesses, which come out much better through written evaluations.
2. My opponent's second argument is that grades equal motivation. However,
it is not the grades themselves, but the idea of feedback that motivates students.
This explains why some don't care about putting effort into their work, because
they don't find letters motivational. The letters themselves provide no real feedback,
just as a gauge for what category you fall into. Getting a personal paragraph
that's very positive is much more of an incentive then a letter "A" written at the top
of your paper.
3. My opponent's third argument is that grades can be used to give students
feedback about their progress. While this is true, they are not the best form of
feedback, especially for middle schoolers. A written evaluation will accomplish the
exact same thing, in a more inspiring way.
4. My opponent's final argument was that grades provide teachers with guidance
for instructional planning. However, you don't need an official grading system to
accomplish this. All a teacher has to do to see how her class is doing is read over
some of their work. Then they can see more in depth what the students are and
aren't getting, instead of just glancing at overall grades, to completely maximize
students' education.

For all these reasons, the grading system should be abolished

I thank my opponent for her responses.

My opponent begins by saying that kids in middle school are more focused on
getting good grades than actually learning. Her reasoning is that with grades,
kids will do exactly what is required to get good grades, and there is no incentive
for doing extra. I would like to point out that with or without the presence of a
grade, whether or not students do extra will not change. A motivated student will
want to learn more regardless of whether or not they will receive a grade for it. A
non-motivated student will not want to learn more, even without a grading system.
In addition, without a grading system, a non-motivated student may not even see
the need to do what is required, as there is no directly correlation between how
they perform on any given assignment and their grade. There is no easy way to
measure learning. Grades offer students a simple way of looking at how much
they understand of what is being taught. Students focus on grades, and the
grades are used as a factor to help the student learn, not as a way to distract them
from learning.

Moving on to my opponent's second contention, she states that grades cause bad
self-esteem. She gives an example of a student who gets an F, which causes
them stress. I would like to look at the long term effects of this example. The
student who failed an assignment would be stressed at first, yes, but the grade is an
easy way for them to know that they do not understand what is being taught.
They can then go to a teacher or parent for help, and better understand what is
being taught. In the long term, the grading system helps the student learn to do
better and helps them deal with stress.

My opponent's third contention is that kids need specialized feedback and

teachers should give a written evaluation, which gives students a more specific
evaluation of what they need to improve on. However, I see no reason not to
implement specialized feedback, written evaluations, or even parent-teacher
conferencing in addition to the current grading system model. It is not necessary
to get rid of grades altogether in order to give students specialized feedback. Just
because students need specialized feedback does not mean that we should have to
replace the grading system with written evaluations. Teachers can give specific
evaluations and grades at the same time, and there is no reason to have to choose
one or the other.

I would now like to defend my own case.

In response to my first contention, my opponent states that standardized ways of

communicating how much a student knows is not as necessary in middle school as
later on, and that middle school should be a time for focusing on students' strengths
and weaknesses. Once again, she brings up the idea of the written evaluation,
which I say can be used in addition to the grading system, instead of replacing
it. She mentions that the grading system is not as necessary for middle schoolers
as it is for when they are older. However, I would like to point out that the
purpose of "middle" school is to be the transition period between elementary and
high school, and adjusting to the high school grading system is an important part
of middle school. Yes, students need to focus on strengths and weaknesses, but
having a standardized way of communicating how much a student knows is just as
important in middle school as it is in high school.

My opponent stated that it is the idea of feedback that motivates students, and
not the grades themselves. She says that written evaluations are more inspiring.
My opponent, once again, is under the belief that if teachers were to use written
evaluations, which some of them do in certain circumstances, we would have to
eliminate grades and abolish the grading system in order to use them. This is
flawed logic. Teachers are fully capable of giving written evaluations for certain
assignments if they feel it necessary, but there is no reason for teachers to only give
a written evaluation without a grade attached to it. Giving written evaluations
does not mean that the grading system should be abolished.

Next, my opponent states that grades are not the best form of feedback, and that
a written evaluation accomplishes the "exact same thing" as a grade, in a more
inspiring way. Written evaluations and grades do not accomplish the exact same
thing. Written evaluations give students constructive criticism on what needs to be
improved, and acknowledgement for what they did well. Grades, on the other
hand, provide students with a direct way of comparing their grades with where a
student wants to be, and how much more a student needs to accomplish in order to
get there. A teacher can easily tell the class "The class average for this
assignment was a B+", and students are then able to check their assignment to
see whether or not they are working up to the standards expected by the teacher.
That cannot be accomplished with written evaluations, and therefore, grades are
just as important, if not more important.

Finally, in response to my fourth contention, my opponent states that a teacher

can guide their instructional planning by seeing in depth what students are and
aren't understanding by looking over their actual work. With hundreds of
students, it can often be difficult for teachers to determine how many people are
actually understanding what is being taught. With a grading system in place,
teachers would better be able to see exactly what students understand, don't
understand, how much they know, and how their progress has changed over a
period of time.

And for these reasons, the grading system should not be abolished

Before I begin, I would like to provide a brief roadmap of what I'll be

talking about. First, I'll be defending my own case, then move on to refute my
opponent's arguments.

In response to my contention about kids being more focused on getting grades,

my opponent claims that whether we have grades or not, the extra amount of extra
learning won't change, and that grades have other benefits, which we should be
focusing on, like the fact that they are a "simple way of looking at how much they
understand what's being taught". I admit that the kids that are slackers and the
kids that are overachievers will continue being slackers and overachievers, and the
presence or absence of a grade isn't necessarily going to change that. However,
the point is that, grades are a barrier for the kids are indifferent about learning.
Because there's a simple wall up saying "This is exactly what you can do to get
the best grade.", and there's no incentive for doing more, the kids that are
indifferent don't. However, if there wasn't a specific grading system, kids wouldn't
have that barrier. The incentive for doing more would simply be the fun of not
knowing how well you can do. This in itself would not only help kids learn, but
make it more fun.

To my second contention, my opponent stated that because of the long term effects
of grades, they are better. He also said that the grade will help them learn what
they don't know, and be less stressed. But let's face it, if a kid gets an F on a
paper, how likely is it that they're going to want to tell their parents, let alone ask
for help? The odds aren't high. Some students might even be too embarrassed
to take an extra few minutes to go talk to their teacher. This is even more
stressful, and by eliminating grades, we are eliminating this stress. Middle school
age kids don't need a standardized way of looking at their achievements, or lack
thereof. If a student is truly struggling, a teacher will recognize it, and most
likely talk to them personally. Therefor, the same result is accomplished in a less
stressful way.

To my third contention, my opponent said that we can have written evaluations,

and grades at the same time, and there's no reason to pick one over the other.
My point is that, for middle-schoolers, which this debate is focused on, written
evaluations are better, because they offer the specialized feedback without the stress
of an overall mark. We need to get rid of grades and start just giving out
something like a written evaluation, because it will be better stress-wise, and will
give kids a more accurate description of their strengths and weaknesses, something
middle-school kids need to focus on.

I would now like to respond to my opponent's arguments.

For his first contention, he claims that we could have the written evaluation and
the grading system, and that the "point of middle school" is to be a transition
period, where adjusting to what's to come is important. I would like to point out
that adjusting to high school-type grading system isn't hard, and that once again, it
is more important to focus on kids' individual strengths and weaknesses, instead of
just handing out generic grades. While it's true we could have both written
evaluations and grades, that would be kind of pointless, especially in middle school.
Also, going off what my opponent said about middle school being a transitional
period, I would like to point out that my focusing purely on their strengths and
weaknesses during this time, they are making the transition from elementary school
(where it doesn't matter as much) to high school (where they really matter).

For his second contention, he claims that my logic is flawed when it comes to my
examples about written evaluation and feedback. I would like to point out that
all my examples about written evaluations are just that: examples. I'm not saying
that this is exactly what would happen, I was just pointing it out as a suggestion.
My point was simply that they would be a good way of getting motivational
feedback to the students at a reasonable rate.

Thirdly, he claims that written evaluations and grades do not accomplish the
exact same thing. I agree, that's not what I meant when I made that
statement. My point was that everything that grades can do, written evaluations
can also do. Students can compare notes on what the teacher said if they want
an average, and teachers will often write what they expect from the students in this
written evaluation. Therefor, students will know exactly how they're doing, what
they need to be doing, and what they're doing well, in addition to providing a
more in-depth way of showing a student where they are and what they need to do
to get to where they want to be. Written evaluations can accomplish the same
things as grades, as well as providing more explanations, so they are a better form
of feedback, especially for middle-schoolers.

Finally, for his fourth contention he claims that since teachers have so many
students, it's difficult for them to determine how many people understand.
However, teachers still grade all of those papers, so yes, there may be a lot of
them, but the sheer amount is not going to stop a teacher from paying attention to
the quality of the work. Because of that, teachers don't need a grading system to
"see exactly what students understand, don't understand, how much they know,
and how their progress has changed over a period of time", all the things my
opponent said a grading system was necessary for.
And for these reasons, the grading system should be abolished.

I am going to begin by looking at my opponent's case, then move on to my own,

and conclude with voting issues.

My opponent first concedes to my point that slackers will continue to be slackers

and overachievers will continue being overachievers whether or not there is a
grading system in place. She then moves on the address the middle ground,
those that are indifferent towards learning. According to my opponent, the
grading system poses as a barrier for those indifferent towards learning, so that
they only do what is necessary and "there is no incentive for doing more".
However, without the presence of a grading system, there is no incentive at all.
In a school with a grading system, the grade acts as the incentive for students to
do the best that they can in order to ensure the best grade that they can achieve.
In a school without a grading system, there is no incentive for doing the best that
a student can do for those that are indifferent to learning, since they are not
motivated to learn. My opponent brings up the incentive regarding "the fun of
not knowing how well you can do" that she claims is only present in the absence of
the grading system for those that are indifferent about learning. Students that
are indifferent about learning neither care about learning nor intentionally try to
avoid learning. Students who do not care about learning, which includes the
category of "indifferent students", will not see "the fun of not knowing how well you
can do" as an incentive, since they do not actively care about "knowing".
Therefore, with a grading system in place, students are more motivated to learn
than without a grading system, and students will learn more.

Moving on to my opponent's second contention, my opponent states that students

who fail an assignment are likely to be embarrassed, and they will not want to tell
their parents or ask for help. She says that by eliminating grades, we are
eliminating stress. Though this may appear to be true at first, in actuality, if we
eliminate grades, we are making life much more stressful for these students in their
future. If a student gets an F on an assignment, they will feel stressed, yes.
And they will most likely not like this stress. Therefore, on their next assignment,
regardless of whether or not they asked for help or not, they will not want to fail
another assignment, and this will encourage students to work harder and try to be
better. Students don't want to fail, and if failing is a possibility, students will be
motivated to try not to fail. Once again, this has shown that grades act as a
strong motivator for students to work harder and try their best.

Regarding my opponent's third contention, my opponent claims that written

evaluations should be done without the use of a grading system. I believe that
there is no reason to eliminate the grading system altogether, regardless of whether
or not written evaluations are in place. My opponent says that an overall grade
increases stress. Realize, however, that not all stress is bad. In fact, stress is
often times good. According to psychiatrist Dr. Lynne Tan of Montefiore
Medical Center in New York City, "Stress is a burst of energy. It's
our body telling us what we need to do."[1] As I have stated in response to her
second contention, eliminating stress altogether just makes everything more stressful
in the future, because without grades to give you a standardized indicator of a
student's progress, a student will be even farther behind when they arrive in a high
school with a grading system. By establishing grades early on, in middle school,
students are given small amounts of stress to prepare them for the stress of high
school, and even decrease that stress. Therefore, middle school grades actually
decrease stress rather than increase it.

I would now like to move on to my own case.

In response to my first contention, my opponent says that it would be "kind of

pointless" to have both a written evaluation system and a grading system at the
same time. Middle school, she says, is supposed to be a time of focusing on
students' strengths and weaknesses, and generic grades do not do this. However,
grades can serve as a way of determining strengths and weaknesses. If a student
were to get an B- on an essay about the laws of physics, and a A on an
assignment on a creative art project, it should be clear to the student that they are
better at creative art than writing about the laws of physics. By comparing one's
own grades, a student can learn their strengths and weaknesses. A written
evaluation may be a useful addition, but whether or not a written evaluation is
used is not the purpose of this debate. Therefore, since grades provide a standard
way of communicating how much a student knows, it is useful for students, parents,
and teachers.
Next, my opponent brings up the point that there are many examples of good
ways to motivate students, and that written evaluations are just one of these ways.
She does not, however, bring up any points that counter the contention itself, the
fact that grades do, in fact, motivate students. Since grades motivate students,
there is no reason why we should abolish them in order to use other means of
motivations.

My opponent then states that written evaluations are a better form of feedback
than grades, because this gives students a way to know how they're doing, what
they need to be doing, and what they're doing well. However, she does not give
any reason for why written evaluations should be used as a replacement for the
grading system. My opponent is providing alternatives that could be used in
addition to the grading system for greater effect, instead of as a replacement.

Finally, in response to my final contention, my opponent says that teachers don't

need to use a grading system in order to see what students understand.
However, with so many papers to grade, it can often be useful for teachers to see
exact numbers that show which areas students are struggling in, and what needs to
be focused on more. If 75% of students understand one topic, and 80%
understand another topic- it would be helpful for the teacher to begin by explaining
the concept that only 75% students understand. Without looking at exact
numbers and percentages, it might be difficult for the teacher to know what needs
more improvement.

Finally, I conclude with voting issues.

My opponent has suggested alternatives to the grading system, such as written

evaluations, that do not specifically give reason for the grading system to be
abolished. I strongly urge you to vote Negative in this round because I have
established a case that explains why the grading system is useful for students, and
have refuted all reasons as to why the grading system is not good for students.

For these reasons, the grading system should not be abolished.

I apologize, I am out of town and will be unable to respond to the last round.
My opponent and I have agreed (check the comments), that you should judge
this debate on only the rounds that have been completed. Once again, I'm
sorry, and