The material wasn't an issue. I had taken the equivelent of two years of university physics and one year of university calculus in a program from a private university. And, as your incredulity goes, the person in charge of accepting that credit as a transfer, refused to accept the credit and apply it. If I didn't have a math, I couldn't graduate, and I don't remember if science was also required. My senior year of Calculus, I spent no time in my class, until the principal found out, and grounded me to class. After which I brought jigsaw puzzles from home and worked them in the back of the class. After that was discovered by the principal, I was "ordered" to sit at my desk. The room had Pi to 50 digits. I still remember the first 50 digits of Pi. I never scored less than a perfect score on any Calculous test, and slept as much as possible. Near the end of the year, the class was nearing the half-way point of my previous class.
I've been smarter than most of my teachers since about the 2nd grade. The class was told to draw "a man with two orange heads" for a halloween display for an upcoming open house. Everyone in the class drew a man with one head on each shoulder, both orange. I drew a man (normal man) with a jack-o-lantern in each hand - a man, with two orange heads. I was sent to the principal's office and beaten for failure to follow directions (a violation of the law, parents must be notified before any beatings). That's also about when I started getting locked in a closet every day for lunch. That teacher had many accolades, and my mother lied about my address to get me in her class.
With that as my benchmark, I was never worse than my second grade teacher.
As for FERPA, the teacher of record was still the other teacher, and I don't think there was anything in the arrangement that would violate FERPA. The "real" teacher gave the topics, and some minimum mandatory work, and I created a class to fill in the other 90% of the time. I don't know what the grades were derived from, but evaluations of the students were passed to the "real" teacher for her to do with as she wished.
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, but I accept that you taught a high school class as a high school student. I expressed my concerns about the arrangement, but I accept that you did it.
Having been brought up with standardized tests, I preferred to give them. Doesn't hurt that for IT training, most people were seeking a certification, almost all of which were multiple choice. So it's a common format, with well known rules. It doesn't hurt that it's almost entirely objective (though many times tests will contain poor questions, whether poor wording in the question, or multiple correct answers, of which the "best" is expected, but often hard to determine).
I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but the basic gist of the above seems to be that standardized tests are objective, and this objectivity is an advantage. I agree that standardized, multiple choice tests are about as objective as possible, and that this is a point in their favor. There is one right answer to any given question, assuming that the question is well written. However, as I said way up the thread, such assessments are not very good at measuring anything except rote memorization. I expect my students to be able to do more than memorize the values of trig functions for a subset of angles or the first 50 digits of pi. I want them to be able to analyze and synthesize. Multiple choice questions do a poor job of assessing a student's ability to to this.
Though in college, in smaller classes, the grades were almost divined by the teachers. Twice I feel I did inferior work, but received a passing grade or better because the teacher felt I "tried". I would have felt robbed if it went the other way, but was happy to have the boost the other way. When I got my master's, it was hard to get anything other than an A. That was great. Why? Because it meant that the people learned, without regard to tests, assignments, and such. You got from it what you put in to it. There were no worries about the freeloaders dragging down the group projects, or the annoying people who slow things down asking questions that were answered in the reading they didn't do. Some people are externally motivated, but the internally motivated ones do worse in a graded environment.
I'm not sure of the relevance of this bit. You have repeatedly said that you want to understand my grading scheme. You are exploring the way in which I do things. I don't see how your experience is relevant to that exploration. Can you clarify?
I have been known to remove questions after the fact, usualy with giving the best score from the two scores, so someone who got it right wouldn't get a deduction for it going away. Nobody has ever complained about that. Weights change as well. To help approximate a curve. I'm generous with grades. But not afraid to fail someone that deserves it.
Is there anything that I have said that in any way indicates that my approach is significantly different from the outline you have just provided?