4 ms·

Forgive me for not knowing, but don't we already have pass/fail in some courses. Some of the more radical colleges have gone completely pass/fail. The premise b

by yardie 16y ago

Forgive me for not knowing, but don't we already have pass/fail in some courses. Some of the more radical colleges have gone completely pass/fail. The premise being that once you've mastered the material you are qualified to move to the next level and if not you try again until you understand. BTW, In elementary school the only Bs I ever received were in Handwriting. It didn't make sense to me then to give a grade on it and it doesn't make any sense now. But now I live in a country (France) where some companies give a graphology test to interviewees. A personality test based on your handwriting.

crpatino 16y ago
In theory, yes... but there are a number of problems, the most obvious one is that those "units of knowledge" used in the pass/fail process are extremely coarse. Grades are handed down per activity... and in general on a monthly or even bi-monthly basis. In theory, this should provide feedback to the teacher to adjust the pace of the learning. In practice, the study program is set in stone and the students who cannot catch on their own will be left behind, no questions asked. The only pass/fail test is at the end of the year, where everything is shoveled together. If the student completely fails to grok subject 3... but excels at subjects 1, 2 and 4. This liability gets lost in the numbers, remaining as a time bomb that will blow on his face in a couple of years when subject 3 is a building block of more complex stuff. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that grading is extremely lax also. This is my personal opinion, any grade less than "B" shows knowledge in either immature (student needs to study more) or flawed (students have inaccurate assumptions that need to be detected and corrected by instructor) stage. If C and D students are allowed to proceed to later stages, they are being set to fail, because the teachers there are unlikely to devote any attention to correct deficits from previous years.

by yardie 16y ago

crpatino 16y ago

In theory, yes... but there are a number of problems, the most obvious one is that those "units of knowledge" used in the pass/fail process are extremely coarse. Grades are handed down per activity... and in general on a monthly or even bi-monthly basis. In theory, this should provide feedback to the teacher to adjust the pace of the learning. In practice, the study program is set in stone and the students who cannot catch on their own will be left behind, no questions asked. The only pass/fail test is at the end of the year, where everything is shoveled together. If the student completely fails to grok subject 3... but excels at subjects 1, 2 and 4. This liability gets lost in the numbers, remaining as a time bomb that will blow on his face in a couple of years when subject 3 is a building block of more complex stuff. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that grading is extremely lax also. This is my personal opinion, any grade less than "B" shows knowledge in either immature (student needs to study more) or flawed (students have inaccurate assumptions that need to be detected and corrected by instructor) stage. If C and D students are allowed to proceed to later stages, they are being set to fail, because the teachers there are unlikely to devote any attention to correct deficits from previous years.