While students largely agree that opportunities to redo assignments matter, teachers are a little more torn on the topic.
Students want the chance at a redo, according to a 2023 EdWeek Research Center study of 1,011 students, ages 13-19. According to the nationally representative survey, redoing assignments motivates students (35%) more than any other approach, such as letting students work on assignments related to their interests (29%), incorporating humor or games into class (29%), or offering more hands-on experiences (29%).
the benefits can include a deeper understanding of the content, increased responsibility and accountability for mistakes, and developing a mindset that hard work and dedication can increase intelligence and ability.
On the other hand, allowing students an extra chance could cause them not to put forward an initial best effort, add to teachers鈥� workloads, and create a question of equity if one person is allowed to better their grade when another is not, teachers told Education Week previously.
The question of whether students should get a redo is part of a larger discussion on grading and assessment in education. Recently, Education Week reported on grade grubbing鈥攁 student, parent, or colleague requesting a teacher change a grade鈥攁nd the concept of equitable grading, which looks for more objective ways to measure students鈥� understanding of the content. Allowing unlimited retakes on tests and quizzes is one equitable grading policy.
According to a , a conservative education policy think tank that advocates for high expectations and academic rigor, 44% of middle school teachers, 28% of elementary teachers, and 27% of high school teachers say their school or district has a policy allowing unlimited retakes on tests and quizzes. Teachers were fairly evenly divided on whether such a policy is harmful or helpful to student engagement.
In a recent , Education Week asked: Should teachers allow students to redo poor-quality work?
Seventy-one percent of the 1,986 respondents said teachers should allow redos, while 8% said they shouldn鈥檛. Twenty-one percent said it depends.
Respondents expanded on their polling responses in the comments. The following responses have been edited lightly for length and clarity.
Allowing redos is reflective of the workforce and real life, said some teachers
In professional "grown-up" life, ... [we] constantly receive feedback from leadership or our teams to "redo for a better result." The notion of everything in life being one and done is not intellectually honest. With students, a mastery-based approach to literally demonstrate that you understand as you move forward is important. Children learning to partner with their teachers and take action on feedback is absolutely an important skill and lesson for the real world. As long as it's not a mid-term exam or final exam, I see nothing wrong with a mastery-based approach. Not unlimited attempts of course, but a reasonable approach. Actually learning and proving you get it is the outcome desired.
We get second chances all the time. Mediocrity reigns large when we run through school 鈥渨ork鈥� and fail to try to inspire, engage, and scaffold. Second chances imply success matters. As teachers, we need to take stock of the countless times we got second chances from our peers, spouses, leadership, bad falls, next shift in a game, etc.
Other teachers are more skeptical about the value of allowing redos
I agree with this in principle, but in practice it is extremely difficult. How can I find the time to regrade this and allow a real opportunity? What is the bar for "poor quality"? How many times? Does this policy apply to everything or just more "soft skills" work, like writing?
There are several factors to consider, but in general, this should be an uncommon practice. Certainly, there are humane reasons such as illness or death in the family, recent displacement due to fire, flooding, and so on. Is it a normally high-performing student? Investigate to see the reason. Did the entire class perform worse than usual in general? Assessment should be progressive to ensure material is learned before moving the class forward. How did the poorly performing student do on quizzes or smaller assignments? Does the performance affect only a single learning objective? Or is the deficit more widespread? Justice is served to the student by a second attempt if there was a verifiable reason for poor performance other than his ability in the material. Allowing re-takes can quickly become a slippery slope if other students catch wind鈥攁nd they will.
Teachers said yes to redoing assignments, but with some exceptions
This is within limits鈥�. I would not allow every assignment and quiz to be redone if it鈥檚 a 鈥渉abit鈥� of rushing on purpose.
Students are still learning, so teachers should build in feedback deadlines to ensure there is time for editing, reworking, and grading. However, they are also learning how to 'be,' and many students have learned there are no consequences to lack of effort due to being allowed to just redo or argue their grade. I think we need to hold deadlines firm and build in soft deadlines for the purpose of checking-in and getting feedback. If students have had the ability to turn in drafts, then their final grade should stand as is, no redos.
It depends on the kind of work that students can redo. Writing, for example, [they can] improve their handwriting, or they can resolve math [assignments] to become familiar with the idea. But other work should be re-explained to understand the concept or teaching goal, and the teacher can give the work in another way, like science projects.
