3 ms·
The title here, while representative of some of the points being made, is really atrocious and invites everyone to imagine what the interview may be pushing. D
by simiones 5y ago
The title here, while representative of some of the points being made, is really atrocious and invites everyone to imagine what the interview may be pushing.
Despite the title, the interview is arguing for grading practices that represent mastery in the class as precisely as possible. They are arguing for meritocracy.
Some specific proposals include:
- not grading homework as it is universally copied
- not using grading to maintain class discipline
- not giving extra credit for conscientiousness as it gives students a skewed view of their actual mastery of the subject matter
- not using grade averages as the final grade for a class, as it doesn't reflect correctly the final knowledge that a student has accumulated by the end of a class (if they are a slow learner)
The author does believe that all of these practices are particularly disadvantageous to certain students with "bad backgrounds", hence the equity angle. But these practices are in fact not helpful for any student who actually wants to learn - they are just as disadvantageous to privileged students as well, as they inflate their grades above their mastery, and set them up for disappointment later on.
- loughnane 5y agoThe title is the name of the book written by the interviewee. I’ve been inspecting the book this week and agree with many of the proposals (don’t grade homework, for example). The one I take most exception to after a first pass is the changing of the grading scale. But still reading it. Shared the link here to get some other perspectives.
- simiones 5y agoYes, apologies, didn't mean to imply that you editorialized it! I was just commenting based on what I had already seen in the early comments: many people saw the title and assumed that the author is proposing something like boosting the grades of minority students, and started arguing from there. Unfortunately, "equity" is a really loaded term in today's American discourse, and I believe the author made a huge mistake in using this word for their proposal.
- DiggyJohnson 5y agoI had my comment misinterpreted along similar lines as you are proposing in the first sentence. That's frustrating because the title is not editorialized at all, and I think is an accurate description of the content of the piece. It is true that this is not a proposal to "get rid of grading" or "pass everyone," but the simple fact that this is trying to maintain meritocracy and improve learning outcomes is the bare minimum and does not mean that it is beyond reproach. I recognize that this is an attempt to merge equity and meritocracy, but I disagree with the approach and rigor of the method. I don't think it's the obvious improvement that you might hold it to be.