The point of education.

[Sieguest]

Last year I did a presentation for my English class concerning the education system. I had been planning for a while to make a thread for this but never had the guts to do it.

This year I'm using this topic for my Academic Decathlon team's speech competition so I was wanting to start some discussion to see what you guys had to say on it so I could get other views on the issue. I also actually plan to send this to TEA as a matter of concern, so I'd really appreciate some input so that I may flesh out my points and get some new takes on the issue.

The Topic
Education is a major part in the advancing world today. However do you believe that the existence of grades, ranking and other things associated with these things detract from the point of education?

Things to Consider
Grades are a teacher's measurement of a student's learning.
The presence of grade inflation and grade deflation.
The uniqueness of every student and how they learn best.
The presence of weighted and unweighted GPAs.
The ranking system.

My stance:
I think that education has lost its focus and has become too much of a sport, this leads to negative effects on the students and in the end the student receives almost nothing worthwhile from attending school.

EDIT: Been trying for the past fifteen minutes to upload the essay as an attachment. Guess you'll have to read the cluttered quote box version. Sorry.

The Education Situation​

Education is something that has been a part of our society for many years. With every passing year the role of education becomes even greater. As the world increases in technology, we are able to produce more well rounded young men and women into society. Education also provides students with a plethora of knowledge to pursue any thing they want for their future (Goldstein, pg 7-9). This is the supposed goal of education, but does the way we provide education really live up to this standard? I daresay that the education system falls extremely short of this standard. You’re probably wondering at this point what is so wrong with the education system. There are many distinct problems that on the surface just seem like another part of everyday life, but these problems are flawed to the point that the use of them should be appalling to anyone. The foremost of these problems is the grading system. The grading system has become over centralized, and this is the one problem that has deteriorated the system to an all ready sub-par level. The way grades totally change the student mentality on education and the unfairness exhibited upon students who learn at a slower rate is detrimental to the educational experience. There are also physical ramifications caused by this system. Although there is fault in the system for this physical setback, one cannot exclude teacher inconsistencies as a part of the problem. All of these factors culminate into unhealthy studying and inefficient memorization (not to be confused with learning) of facts for brief periods. However, part of the solution all ready exists in some places. With the integrating of year-round schooling as well as a revamped system of measuring student progress, the education system may come back to meet the standard of education deserved by the students.

The education system has used a method of measuring student learning called grading. Grading assigns a number and a letter that is supposed to give an accurate determination of how well a student is learning. That is a fallacy; the grading system contains numerous oversights, and it is so incredibly flawed in these places that it does not provide an accurate representation of learning. The grading system shows more of how a student is performing; one cannot confuse the concept of performance with the concept of learning. The learning process implies that students are presented with a concept, and over a period of time students practice the concept via homework to attain a level of understanding. Students are then assessed via testing to demonstrate mastery over the concept. It is undeniable that every student has strengths and weaknesses, and each student learns at a slower or faster rate than another. With this in mind, one cannot justify the principle of grading homework. Grading homework is virtually the same thing as grading the practice students undergo to attain a level of understanding. This is unfair to students who learn a concept slower because they are punished with lower grades compared to those who grasp the concept quicker; despite the fact that at some point both students may attain the same level of mastery over said concept. This one flaw all ready proves sufficient as to why the current grading system is inadequate; the grading system measures performance, and not learning as claimed by so many school districts. Another flaw in the grading system is that it is wholly inconsistent outside of the singularity. The presence of grade inflation, a term which describes the varying grade given by multiple areas for an identical piece of work i.e. what may constitute an “A” here only constitutes to a “C” elsewhere, irrefutably shows the inconsistency and inaccuracy of grading. It also emphasizes the point that grading measures performance and not learning (Riley, Richard W., Sharon P. Robinson, and Joseph P. Conaty). The grading system also has a negative effect on the student mentality concerning the goal of education. The student goal is now more centralized around acquiring a high grade for the present time instead of actually learning the material for their future. This inadvertently promotes memorization of concepts; the information is committed to the short term memory where it is soon forgotten. Unlike the way learning a concept commits information to the long term memory allowing for the convenient recall of information ("Year-Round School and Other Expert Advice - FamilyEducation.com").
There is also the point concerning how the educational system provides a physical detriment to the body. Schools promote taking rigorous courses, yet those who do take these courses end up staying up late nights and losing sleep. Then the student is expected to learn and retain information the following day. This is not only irrational, but is on the verge of stupidity for a system to even expect such tasks from higher achieving students. Lack of sleep lowers the student’s mental faculties and weakens the immune system, leaving the student susceptible to illness. I challenge any educator to get only four to five hours of sleep for one 189 days, and then engage in serious mental activity to show them the folly of the system they operate under. It is preposterous that a student must sacrifice his/her physical health for his/her education, or actually I should say for a meaningless and inaccurate number (Kohn, Alfie).
There is a way to fix how the education system robs students of actual learning which involves changes to the grading system and the school structure. One can find part of the answer to the education problem by looking at year-round schooling. Contrary to popular belief among students, year-round school does not mean students attend school for more days. In fact, year-round schools are in session for the same amount of days per year as are schools that have summer vacation; year-round schools have more short holidays interspersed throughout the year instead of a long break. The use of year-round schools may help students retain what they are taught by removing the large period of inactivity during which students forget a lot of information (showing that they didn’t learn it during the year) ("Year-Round School and Other Expert Advice - FamilyEducation.com"). The other and most vital part of the solution is to completely revamp the grading system. Homework and other daily work should not be graded because that is the time when the student is learning and practicing the concept being taught ("Clearly Defined Grading System Will Start Your Year off with an A"). Students should be given a small amount of articles to practice certain facets of the concept being taught every night; then the students along with the teacher should review the homework to check for understanding and give needed clarification and assistance for that particular facet of the concept. After spending enough time to allow students to gain mastery with the concept, educators can give a test to assess mastery. The tests can be graded and will give an accurate determination of student mastery over the given concept as students will have had ample time to learn the concept and acquire assistance inside and outside of class to reinforce this. This system still leaves responsibility on the students to complete given homework in order to make sure they have understanding of the concept. The proposed system also leaves the responsibility of studying to help reinforce classroom instruction and learn the material for tests on the student. This system alleviates the pressure that makes students only memorize concepts for a short period, and it eliminates the punishment of students who take longer to grasp a concept than other students. It also alleviates the homework load of students while still getting much needed practice of the concept, and it allows students to maintain a healthy lifestyle and sleeping habits. This proposed system of grading will also alleviate pressure from educators and will allow them to effectively perform their job. This may also help solve the grade inflation problem because tests are generally not affected too much by teacher’s standards. The only way to truly cut grade inflation is to standardize the tests given across the entire area so as to make the scale even (Riley, Richard W., Sharon P. Robinson, and Joseph P. Conaty). This is simple enough at the local level; in fact, this is all ready being somewhat implemented via EOC testing. The fusion of this proposed grading system with the structure of year-round schools will allow for effective learning and maximum retention of information taught to the students. In effect these changes would greatly improve the quality and health of both students and educators alike.
Our education system is in a deplorable state; the grading system punishes students and gives the wrong mentality of the goal of education. The inaccuracy of the grading system also gives false measurement of success because the grading system measuring performance and not learning. Students taking rigorous courses pay for it with their health, and students come to school with their mental faculties hindered because of a lack of sleep. Hopefully with the adoption of year-round schooling and a revamped grading system that takes the pressure of memorization off of students, the education system can realign its focus on the true purpose of its existence: Learning and the propelling of successful young men and women into our communities to help better not just themselves, or their community, but the nation, or even the entire world.

Works Cited​

"Clearly Defined Grading System Will Start Your Year Off With an A." Texas Teachers. Texas Teachers of Tomorrow. Web. 29 Mar. 2010.
Goldstein, Stephen R. Law and Public Education: Cases and Materials. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1974. Print.
Kohn, Alfie. "Rethinking Homework." Alfie Kohn Homepage. Jan. 2007. Web. 07

Apr. 2010. <http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/rethinkinghomework.htm>.

Riley, Richard W., Sharon P. Robinson, and Joseph P. Conaty. "Archived: WHAT DO STUDENT GRADES MEAN? DIFFERENCES ACROSS SCHOOLS." U.S. Department of Education. Web. 29 Mar. 2010. <http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ResearchRpts/grades.html>.
"Year-Round School and Other Expert Advice - FamilyEducation.com." School Resources & Educational Help By Grade & Subject For Parents - FamilyEducation.com. Web. 1 Apr. 2010. <http://school.familyeducation.com/experimental-education/educational-research/41266.html>.

​

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

Right, off the bat, I see that the school that I go to, is somewhere between the supposed status quo, and the proposed remedy. Basically, we don't mark homework, the teacher checks to see if it's done, and if we need help on it. Testing, is set by the teachers, though, but all the larger more important exams are written by an external group of examiners. Also, don't have year-round school. In subjects various subjects, there are topic tests, which are supposed to be indicative of where the students are.

Anyway, a number of points you've raised there are quite interesting. Grade inflation, year-round schooling, and the idea of easing the pressure, to allow students to have more "down" time. I think these are valid points, and I have run into most of these personally, apart from year-round schooling.

Though, your points about the purposes of grades, I don't entirely agree with. You say that we are measuring performing, and yes that is not learning, and yes, it does encourage cramming and bad study practices. However, in order to for a student perform well in an area, he must know about it. And in effect you're still testing performance with your proposed mastery tests. Additionally, I believe that performance based tests, ensure that students undergo revision for such tests, reaffirming their knowledge. Furthermore, I believe that grading is necessary. For prospective employers, they will want to see how good a student you were, and it does have some significance when one is gaining entrance to tertiary education, at least in Australia.

Aside from that, I think you're pretty good.

 

[Dre89]

I agree with Bob's last point. Grading allows employers to select the best prospects.

 

[Sieguest]

Right, off the bat, I see that the school that I go to, is somewhere between the supposed status quo, and the proposed remedy. Basically, we don't mark homework, the teacher checks to see if it's done, and if we need help on it. Testing, is set by the teachers, though, but all the larger more important exams are written by an external group of examiners. Also, don't have year-round school. In subjects various subjects, there are topic tests, which are supposed to be indicative of where the students are.

Anyway, a number of points you've raised there are quite interesting. Grade inflation, year-round schooling, and the idea of easing the pressure, to allow students to have more "down" time. I think these are valid points, and I have run into most of these personally, apart from year-round schooling.

Yeah, it had always sort of bugged me how my friends and I just started to accept that going to bed at 2:00 AM was just a part of school. That and I was never a fan of my grading system done in most Texas schools.

Though, your points about the purposes of grades, I don't entirely agree with. You say that we are measuring performing, and yes that is not learning, and yes, it does encourage cramming and bad study practices. However, in order to for a student perform well in an area, he must know about it. And in effect you're still testing performance with your proposed mastery tests. Additionally, I believe that performance based tests, ensure that students undergo revision for such tests, reaffirming their knowledge. Furthermore, I believe that grading is necessary. For prospective employers, they will want to see how good a student you were, and it does have some significance when one is gaining entrance to tertiary education, at least in Australia.

This may be true. Now that I've thought about it some, there may not be any way to stop cramming and such before tests. Seeing as how even without grades, a student would probably still cram just to avoid being reprimanded or get a good word from the teacher when it comes to applying for colleges or jobs. With that in mind, instead of a numerical grade, wouldn't a more qualitative grade be of more use? A qualitative description of the student's performance would tell much more to employers and institutions of higher education than a number. A qualitative report on the student's mastery of a subject will identify exactly which areas are a student's strong points and which areas are a student's weak points. Numerical grades have a tendency to shadow student's weak spots. A grading period where the student did not do so well can easily be shadowed by excellent grades in the remaining grading periods. An employer would never know of the students weakness in that area.


Also in a description of the student's mastery the teacher may actually note how the student is learning. This may encourage the student to actively participate in learning the material. Even if the student just "acts the part" to get a good report, they are forcing themselves to use good habits, consequently getting them to learn the material even if they are just trying to go through the motions. I also suppose the use of cumulative exams along with concept mastery exams would work in conjunction to force even students who cram to look at past covered material and current material. Even if the student only looks at these at times when they're cramming. They will eventually expose them-self to the material enough times to where it starts to "stick" in their minds and become committed to long term memory.

Aside from that, I think you're pretty good.

Many thanks!

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

Yeah, it had always sort of bugged me how my friends and I just started to accept that going to bed at 2:00 AM was just a part of school. That and I was never a fan of my grading system done in most Texas schools.

Fun Fact: One of my best friends says he regularly gets around with 2 hours of sleep. I don't entirely believe that, but there may be a grain of truth to it. But then with him, it's probably not due to the actual level of work, it's instead him just staying up too late.

This may be true. Now that I've thought about it some, there may not be any way to stop cramming and such before tests. Seeing as how even without grades, a student would probably still cram just to avoid being reprimanded or get a good word from the teacher when it comes to applying for colleges or jobs. With that in mind, instead of a numerical grade, wouldn't a more qualitative grade be of more use? A qualitative description of the student's performance would tell much more to employers and institutions of higher education than a number. A qualitative report on the student's mastery of a subject will identify exactly which areas are a student's strong points and which areas are a student's weak points. Numerical grades have a tendency to shadow student's weak spots. A grading period where the student did not do so well can easily be shadowed by excellent grades in the remaining grading periods. An employer would never know of the students weakness in that area.

Also in a description of the student's mastery the teacher may actually note how the student is learning. This may encourage the student to actively participate in learning the material. Even if the student just "acts the part" to get a good report, they are forcing themselves to use good habits, consequently getting them to learn the material even if they are just trying to go through the motions. I also suppose the use of cumulative exams along with concept mastery exams would work in conjunction to force even students who cram to look at past covered material and current material. Even if the student only looks at these at times when they're cramming. They will eventually expose them-self to the material enough times to where it starts to "stick" in their minds and become committed to long term memory.

Well, numerical grades are very easy. They offer an objective measure of how a student performed in a course, at least in the case of external exams. In that sense, it's very good because as an employer, you know roughly how good a student is. Though I understand that there is a lot more to a student than a number. So I don't see why we can't have grades and qualitative reports. That's what we do in my school. We'll get the reports back, which give us our mark and our comparison to the average, along with a teacher's comment. So in effect, it's the best of both worlds. This would allow a measure of objectivity to the report, as well as an in-depth understanding of the student's strengths and weaknesses and his learning practices.

Many thanks!

No worries.

 

[asianaussie]

If this thread is still active...

Firstly, you make some assaultable generalisations, which I would attempt to remove or make defendable (ie you refer to students being fatigued for the sake of meaningless and inaccurate grades, this is not always the case, as grades themselves are arguably valuable feedback, they are a measurable system of achievement for the students themselves, etc). If you are going for impact and aren't to be rebutted, then ignore this point.

I'm not 100% sure which curriculum model you're criticising...could you give me a rundown on precisely what the school year would entail, ie how many terms/semesters, the length and frequency of breaks, the sort of module size for a typical subject such as English or Biology, etc

I was schooled with the International Baccalaureate, which is a 2 year course that assesses a selection of subjects from a particularly wide curriculum at the end of the 2 years, with no tests in-between actually counting towards the leaving-school score. Cramming for this particular test is actually detrimental, given the diverse spread of topics one must cover. It is incredibly centralised in the subjects that can afford to be centralised: the sciences and the mathematics subjects, with clearly defined boundaries in each mark.

I agree with your assessment of qualitative reports, but I feel that it's an incredibly difficult system to implement without either raising the number of qualified subject teachers or reducing class sizes, as I don't see any way lengthy reports will be written on every subject that requires attention.

As you may have gleaned, my perspective on topics such as these is realist: sometimes you can come up with excellent and comprehensive solutions that benefit everyone so long as significant work is put in, and the qualitative report proposal is just that: a well-intentioned and hypothetically efficient system that will likely fail in standard schools due to either lack of devotion from teachers or a plain lack of teachers. While your solution is definitely commendable and would definitely improve the standard of teaching and learning (assuming students receive these reports as feedback), I feel that it is, in reality, too difficult to effectively implement without an enormous overhaul of the school system as a whole. This pre-requisite has its own problems, of course.

Also, the habit of cramming is almost always rooted in student laziness in continual revision or teacher inefficiency in scheduling, as opposed to the syllabus containing an unrealistic amount of material, so you may want to address this, rather than placing the issue of cramming under the heading 'problems with grading'.

 

[El Nino]

I skimmed your essay, Guest, because the paragraphs are crammed together, and it's a little hard to read.

I agree that in the end the graduate of an educational system like that in the U.S. probably comes out with very little that is worthwhile, at least at the B.S. level. I'm not sure I agree with you on the reasons for why that is though.

There are some people who are mentally unfit for the way education is structured. This poster is one of them. I was kicked out once, got back in, and barely graduated. Now I am employed in a field in which I have no future. I'm laying that out to expose my own personal bias.

My own subjective take on the subject, for what it's worth. I'll limit my comments to mid-level colleges, not to the super elite or the vocational institutions:

The systematic approach to learning is often detrimental to learning itself. The kind of people who do well in school aren't necessarily the ones who have a genuine interest in the subject. If you are ambitious and disciplined, you will get far in school, as long as you don't crash and burn. Of course, it is possible to be both disciplined and show genuine talent and interest.

I think modern society has done away with the need for Renaissance men and women. I think modern society needs people who can be productive. The school sytem favors these types the most. I also think the future of labor will become more and more specialized. The days when people attended university for the sake of learning and attaining knowledge are over, and they have been over for a long time. College is too expensive. The only way it would be worth your while is if you can graduate and get a degree that will help you pay off your loans. And in order to do that, you not only have to pick a field that is in demand, you have to excel at it. And the only way to prove it is to get the grades.

Furthermore, if you are the type who likes to have knowledge for the sake of knowledge, unless that information is applicable to the world at large, no one cares. Society has long abandonned its need for people like you.

And if you think the U.S. education system is torture on the body, try the Chinese system on for size:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jun/28/chinese-university-entrance-exams

tl;dr - Learn on your own time. School isn't really about that. It's an achievement based system meant to weed out the weak and condition people into productive members of society according to the current demands of the modern industrialized economy.

/cynical

 

[Dre89]

I skimmed your essay, Guest, because the paragraphs are crammed together, and it's a little hard to read.

I agree that in the end the graduate of an educational system like that in the U.S. probably comes out with very little that is worthwhile, at least at the B.S. level. I'm not sure I agree with you on the reasons for why that is though.

There are some people who are mentally unfit for the way education is structured. This poster is one of them. I was kicked out once, got back in, and barely graduated. Now I am employed in a field in which I have no future. I'm laying that out to expose my own personal bias.

My own subjective take on the subject, for what it's worth. I'll limit my comments to mid-level colleges, not to the super elite or the vocational institutions:

The systematic approach to learning is often detrimental to learning itself. The kind of people who do well in school aren't necessarily the ones who have a genuine interest in the subject. If you are ambitious and disciplined, you will get far in school, as long as you don't crash and burn. Of course, it is possible to be both disciplined and show genuine talent and interest.

I think modern society has done away with the need for Renaissance men and women. I think modern society needs people who can be productive. The school sytem favors these types the most. I also think the future of labor will become more and more specialized. The days when people attended university for the sake of learning and attaining knowledge are over, and they have been over for a long time. College is too expensive. The only way it would be worth your while is if you can graduate and get a degree that will help you pay off your loans. And in order to do that, you not only have to pick a field that is in demand, you have to excel at it. And the only way to prove it is to get the grades.

Furthermore, if you are the type who likes to have knowledge for the sake of knowledge, unless that information is applicable to the world at large, no one cares. Society has long abandonned its need for people like you.

And if you think the U.S. education system is torture on the body, try the Chinese system on for size:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jun/28/chinese-university-entrance-exams

tl;dr - Learn on your own time. School isn't really about that. It's an achievement based system meant to weed out the weak and condition people into productive members of society according to the current demands of the modern industrialized economy.

/cynical

Given that you admitted that you bias, was that post meant more for logical debate, or to get something off your chest? I don't mean that in a rude way, I don't mind either way (watch Krazy come in and be a Nazi about debate rules).

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

And if you think the U.S. education system is torture on the body, try the Chinese system on for size:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jun/28/chinese-university-entrance-exams

That is horrible. The way it's just based on a single exam is silly. It doesn't take into account how good a student was up to that exam, only his performance in it. What if someone were to have a bad day, or get sick on the day of the test? Oh sorry, an otherwise good student gets a bad result he doesn't deserve and guess what, his entire future is now jeopardised!

tl;dr - Learn on your own time. School isn't really about that. It's an achievement based system meant to weed out the weak and condition people into productive members of society according to the current demands of the modern industrialized economy.

That reminds me of a certain song. Can anyone guess what it is? It was written by Pink Floyd, if that helps.

 

[Sieguest]

Well, numerical grades are very easy. They offer an objective measure of how a student performed in a course, at least in the case of external exams. In that sense, it's very good because as an employer, you know roughly how good a student is. Though I understand that there is a lot more to a student than a number. So I don't see why we can't have grades and qualitative reports. That's what we do in my school. We'll get the reports back, which give us our mark and our comparison to the average, along with a teacher's comment. So in effect, it's the best of both worlds. This would allow a measure of objectivity to the report, as well as an in-depth understanding of the student's strengths and weaknesses and his learning practices.

I could see this working. Though I'm not sure about numerical grades being objective. The existence of the idea of grade inflation and deflation entails that numerical grades are subjective. However assuming the teacher is honest, a combination of numerical and qualitative grading would be beneficial. The qualitative report would tell things that the number can't tell. And the number would be a lot more meaningful with an explanation behind it in my opinion.

If this thread is still active...

Firstly, you make some assaultable generalisations, which I would attempt to remove or make defendable (ie you refer to students being fatigued for the sake of meaningless and inaccurate grades, this is not always the case, as grades themselves are arguably valuable feedback, they are a measurable system of achievement for the students themselves, etc). If you are going for impact and aren't to be rebutted, then ignore this point.

Grade inflation says otherwise. The fact that making an “A” here equates to only making a “C” somewhere else takes away from the credulity of grades. Here I'm told I'm the cream of the crop but go elsewhere and be told that my work is sub-par when it's the exact same thing. I'd hardly call a system that fluctuates so much in its definition of excellence as accurate, which is the basis of its value.

Also, what else would students be staying up late hours doing homework for? In a system where the number wasn't the driving force behind such things. A student would have no need to stay up worrying about getting this assignment to look good and be in on time. They know that "I can work on what I need to work on and be good." Any other reason for the student staying up late would be outside of educational reasons.

I'm not 100% sure which curriculum model you're criticising...could you give me a rundown on precisely what the school year would entail, ie how many terms/semesters, the length and frequency of breaks, the sort of module size for a typical subject such as English or Biology, etc

And this is where I must confess that what I'm saying in my essay and now may not apply to every where else in the world. I wrote the essay for my English class so it's fairly focused on the education system in Texas... and even more specifically Midland. Though with all of the research I did for the essay. I feel the problem with grades is on a more widespread scale.

Here's how MISD runs:
We have a fall semester and spring semester
We have general classes (but they call them advanced because some parents got their feelings hurt that their children were considered in "regular" classes compared to the Honors and GT students.)

We have Pre-AP classes on the Honors level or GT level. (Though there isn't much of a difference.... GT students just get G stuck in the course name and most teachers don't even differentiate between the two.)

And we have AP classes on the Honors or GT level.
The longest classes are two semesters (1 year) (your core subjects and some electives) and shorter classes are 1 semester.

Can't give you a definite number on the breaks since the calendar gets switched up every year. But generally breaks are from 3 5 days with the exception of Christmas and Summer which two weeks and two and a half months respectively.

Up until your senior year classes generally run like this: Teachers have a skeleton curriculum of stuff for the class they're teaching. Everything else such as tests and whatnot is left to their discretion. After Christmas break, they do a priority shift and all teachers start nailing the TEKS curriculum to make sure students pass the TAKS. Then once TAKS passes teachers go back to their own devices. Class sizes generally range from as small at 7 to as large as 32.

I was schooled with the International Baccalaureate, which is a 2 year course that assesses a selection of subjects from a particularly wide curriculum at the end of the 2 years, with no tests in-between actually counting towards the leaving-school score. Cramming for this particular test is actually detrimental, given the diverse spread of topics one must cover. It is incredibly centralised in the subjects that can afford to be centralised: the sciences and the mathematics subjects, with clearly defined boundaries in each mark.

Yeah. We don’t have IB where I live. x.x Just AP. The school system where I live is thinking about adopting EOC testing..

I agree with your assessment of qualitative reports, but I feel that it's an incredibly difficult system to implement without either raising the number of qualified subject teachers or reducing class sizes, as I don't see any way lengthy reports will be written on every subject that requires attention.

I don’t think that would be necessary (the reduction of classes or increase in teachers). Most of my teachers start closing down their grades about three days before the grading period ends so that they can get everything finalized. Other teachers could do something like this and during those three days they could evaluate students’ learning. Have grades due by 9:00am on the day the next grading period starts and that gives teachers five days to complete their reports. Also, the report doesn’t have to be necessarily lengthy either. It just needs to display that student’s performance in class.

As you may have gleaned, my perspective on topics such as these is realist: sometimes you can come up with excellent and comprehensive solutions that benefit everyone so long as significant work is put in, and the qualitative report proposal is just that: a well-intentioned and hypothetically efficient system that will likely fail in standard schools due to either lack of devotion from teachers or a plain lack of teachers. While your solution is definitely commendable and would definitely improve the standard of teaching and learning (assuming students receive these reports as feedback), I feel that it is, in reality, too difficult to effectively implement without an enormous overhaul of the school system as a whole. This pre-requisite has its own problems, of course.

If there is a lack of devotion in teachers, then the simple solution is just to hire more willing teachers. A teacher without devotion to his/her students makes a bad one anyway in my opinion. Also see above.

Also, the habit of cramming is almost always rooted in student laziness in continual revision or teacher inefficiency in scheduling, as opposed to the syllabus containing an unrealistic amount of material, so you may want to address this, rather than placing the issue of cramming under the heading 'problems with grading'.

Well, there is no way to solve student laziness issue. But I’m not sure of the correlation you are drawing with “unrealistic amount of material” and my heading “problems with grading”. As long as the teacher gives adequate time for the student to grasp the concept at his or her own pace, then the teacher has done his/her job. If the student still crams, then they will get no reward via a high grade and potentially high rank in the long run. By removing components of what makes school a competition, we eliminate the need for some actions common in school. But in that light, I suppose it may just suffice to remove the ranking system in this case.

I skimmed your essay, Guest, because the paragraphs are crammed together, and it's a little hard to read.

I agree that in the end the graduate of an educational system like that in the U.S. probably comes out with very little that is worthwhile, at least at the B.S. level. I'm not sure I agree with you on the reasons for why that is though.

There are some people who are mentally unfit for the way education is structured. This poster is one of them. I was kicked out once, got back in, and barely graduated. Now I am employed in a field in which I have no future. I'm laying that out to expose my own personal bias.

My own subjective take on the subject, for what it's worth. I'll limit my comments to mid-level colleges, not to the super elite or the vocational institutions:

The systematic approach to learning is often detrimental to learning itself. The kind of people who do well in school aren't necessarily the ones who have a genuine interest in the subject. If you are ambitious and disciplined, you will get far in school, as long as you don't crash and burn. Of course, it is possible to be both disciplined and show genuine talent and interest.

I think modern society has done away with the need for Renaissance men and women. I think modern society needs people who can be productive. The school sytem favors these types the most. I also think the future of labor will become more and more specialized. The days when people attended university for the sake of learning and attaining knowledge are over, and they have been over for a long time. College is too expensive. The only way it would be worth your while is if you can graduate and get a degree that will help you pay off your loans. And in order to do that, you not only have to pick a field that is in demand, you have to excel at it. And the only way to prove it is to get the grades.

Furthermore, if you are the type who likes to have knowledge for the sake of knowledge, unless that information is applicable to the world at large, no one cares. Society has long abandonned its need for people like you.

And if you think the U.S. education system is torture on the body, try the Chinese system on for size:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jun/28/chinese-university-entrance-exams

tl;dr - Learn on your own time. School isn't really about that. It's an achievement based system meant to weed out the weak and condition people into productive members of society according to the current demands of the modern industrialized economy.

/cynical

I do see your point. However we can still learn what is important to be productive in society without the whole competitive aspect we see in the school system. People can learn for the sake of learning on their own time and they can do that through school if they wish/have the time and money to do so. But this whole competitive scene behind schooling “weeds out” students who could potentially be productive to society had they not had their self esteem crushed to nothing because they grasp concepts a bit slower and because of that they make low grades and are ranked 9000 out of 9001.

Also that's pretty bad how that goes on over there in China. Jeez!

 

[El Nino]

Given that you admitted that you bias, was that post meant more for logical debate, or to get something off your chest? I don't mean that in a rude way, I don't mind either way (watch Krazy come in and be a Nazi about debate rules).

Practically everything I post contains personal bias and involves me getting **** off my chest (because there is A LOT of **** on my chest these days). But I take it that everything posted here is fair game for counter-argument. Even if it's just a sloppy idea that I just threw together out of spite for The System.

That reminds me of a certain song. Can anyone guess what it is? It was written by Pink Floyd, if that helps.

I'm guessing not this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_bvT-DGcWw

Because that would be too obvious.

I do see your point. However we can still learn what is important to be productive in society without the whole competitive aspect we see in the school system. People can learn for the sake of learning on their own time and they can do that through school if they wish/have the time and money to do so. But this whole competitive scene behind schooling “weeds out” students who could potentially be productive to society had they not had their self esteem crushed to nothing because they grasp concepts a bit slower and because of that they make low grades and are ranked 9000 out of 9001.

In industrialized societies, productivity comes from competition. That is, under the capitalist ideology, competition is the driving force behind productivity and innovation. In a race, someone has to lose in order for someone else to be declared the winner.

The purpose of education in a society like the U.S. is to "get ahead." It's like the training ground for "real life." And we have completely structured it to promote things we value as a society, while throwing away those who don't measure up to our standards.

I do agree with you that a person with potential can be crushed early on in the system because they weren't fast enough or no one gave them the chance. But then, my take on American culture is that it values self-sufficiency. Education in the U.S. may be less of a learning experience and more of a testing experience meant to separate those who were born ready from those who were not.

People have been talking about "education reform" since I was a wee little tot. And all up until now, I ain't seen no changes.

Maybe people have to find their own path to success without relying on a pre-established system to tell them how to find it. Because it seems that that system doesn't know what the **** it is doing.

 

[KrazyGlue]

(watch Krazy come in and be a Nazi about debate rules).

Wait, what? Lol.

----------------

Anyways, I finally took the time to read the OP, so I think I'll formulate my opinion soon and post it.

 

[Dre89]

You're always a rule Nazi lol.

If we're joking around in the social thread, you'll come in and tell us we shouldn't be lol.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing or anything.

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

I could see this working. Though I'm not sure about numerical grades being objective. The existence of the idea of grade inflation and deflation entails that numerical grades are subjective. However assuming the teacher is honest, a combination of numerical and qualitative grading would be beneficial. The qualitative report would tell things that the number can't tell. And the number would be a lot more meaningful with an explanation behind it in my opinion.

Well, if centralised standardised tests were used the numerical grades would become quite objective. Furthermore, subjective numerical grades for things that are not centralised can be moderated, to be more objective. I'm not sure about the actual process, but in Australia or at least New South Wales, the school marks awarded for in school stuff by the school, are moderated so that they match relatively well with the standardised test marks.

I'm guessing not this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_bvT-DGcWw

Because that would be too obvious.

No silly, it's called Another Brick in the Wall Part 2.

 

[Sieguest]

Well, if centralised standardised tests were used the numerical grades would become quite objective. Furthermore, subjective numerical grades for things that are not centralised can be moderated, to be more objective. I'm not sure about the actual process, but in Australia or at least New South Wales, the school marks awarded for in school stuff by the school, are moderated so that they match relatively well with the standardised test marks.

Good point. It seems like this would be leaning more towards a need to socialize the education structure (at least to an extent). Though it might be better that way, I'm sure the American population would be in an uproar.

Now I'm intrigued about how other countries run their education system (with the exception of the Chinese from what I've seen).

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

Good point. It seems like this would be leaning more towards a need to socialize the education structure (at least to an extent). Though it might be better that way, I'm sure the American population would be in an uproar.

Now I'm intrigued about how other countries run their education system (with the exception of the Chinese from what I've seen).

In Australia, the majority of the schools are government run. There are a few private schools, and they are funded privately, from donations and school fees. However, all of the students in NSW at least, who wish not to drop out, must sit the Higher School Certificate, an exam that determines what course they get into in University.

 

[asianaussie]

Same goes for Victoria and the VCE, though there are separate programs for apprenticeship/TAFE courses, as well as IB courses in some private schools.

All of the examination results are moderated by a series of teachers (up to 6 for English, or so I hear).

Lots of Australians in the DH o.o

 

[Dre89]

Maybe it's because Australians are more intelligent than other people.

Just kidding.

 

[KrazyGlue]

You're always a rule Nazi lol.

If we're joking around in the social thread, you'll come in and tell us we shouldn't be lol.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing or anything.

I've only ever done that like twice, but ok. It's usually only when there's like 20 straight posts with absolutely no substance. I mean, the Social Thread isn't meant to be Pool Room 2.0; it's more for DH-y things that aren't actual debates.

 

[Sieguest]

In Australia, the majority of the schools are government run. There are a few private schools, and they are funded privately, from donations and school fees. However, all of the students in NSW at least, who wish not to drop out, must sit the Higher School Certificate, an exam that determines what course they get into in University.

Same goes for Victoria and the VCE, though there are separate programs for apprenticeship/TAFE courses, as well as IB courses in some private schools.

All of the examination results are moderated by a series of teachers (up to 6 for English, or so I hear).

Interesting. I happen to live in the state everyone in America seems to be getting angry with... The education here is state regulated and apparently Texas is not doing so hot of a job with what it's teaching its students. Doing things such as things that are on the topic of taking "pro-Islamic" content from textbooks. Among other things in the past...

Lots of Australians in the DH o.o

This is true. Pretty cool in my opinion. Only on the internet would I be able to converse with many Australians in a manner like this.

Maybe it's because Australians are more intelligent than other people.

Just kidding.

I disagree. Research shows that people with the username "Guest" are ten times smarter than anyone within a 2 mile proximity of them... Oh wait... that still doesn't make me very smart.

I've only ever done that like twice, but ok. It's usually only when there's like 20 straight posts with absolutely no substance. I mean, the Social Thread isn't meant to be Pool Room 2.0; it's more for DH-y things that aren't actual debates.

Hey! None of that in my thread! I forbid it!

 

[Dre89]

I disagree. Research shows that people with the username "Guest" are ten times smarter than anyone within a 2 mile proximity of them... Oh wait... that still doesn't make me very smart.
[/COLOR]

Guest, more like......Host.

That's one of those jokes I'll regret in the near future.

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

The internet maybe a great thing, but it rarely forgets. That joke will haunt you for the rest of your days. Haunt you I say!

 

[Dre89]

Thanks Bob Jane Convenience Store.

Dre strikes again.

 

[KrazyGlue]

^ Lol.

Anyways, I've tried to read everything, but it took a long time and I probably have forgotten something. So I apologize if I repeat a point.

Now, I do agree with some of the issues Guest has brought up with the grading system. Both a grading system and other forms of evaluation have their merits and their issues.

What I always wonder is why there can't be a "hybrid" system. A teacher could not only provide the numerical grade for a student, but also a page-long written evaluation. This not only shows how much the student "knows the material" (grades) but also provides insight into their study habits, class participation, intellectual curiosity, behavior, etc. (written evaluation). It could be a lot of work for teachers, but honestly I think it would, by far, provide the most accurate and detailed information on a student.
---EDIT: After re-reading everything, I see that Bob Jane has already made this point.---

On a separate note, GPAs are dumb. Grades should just be provided as a number between 0 and 100. GPAs encourage students (including myself) to aim simply for the low end of the letter grade. If I need a 93 to get an A, I don't care about getting a 100. I only care about what gets me that magic number. With numerical grades, you actually have to try hard at every assignment.

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

^ Lol.

Anyways, I've tried to read everything, but it took a long time and I probably have forgotten something. So I apologize if I repeat a point.

Now, I do agree with some of the issues Guest has brought up with the grading system. Both a grading system and other forms of evaluation have their merits and their issues.

What I always wonder is why there can't be a "hybrid" system. A teacher could not only provide the numerical grade for a student, but also a page-long written evaluation. This not only shows how much the student "knows the material" (grades) but also provides insight into their study habits, class participation, intellectual curiosity, behavior, etc. (written evaluation). It could be a lot of work for teachers, but honestly I think it would, by far, provide the most accurate and detailed information on a student.
---EDIT: After re-reading everything, I see that Bob Jane has already made this point.---

Yeah... That's quite funny actually.

On a separate note, GPAs are dumb. Grades should just be provided as a number between 0 and 100. GPAs encourage students (including myself) to aim simply for the low end of the letter grade. If I need a 93 to get an A, I don't care about getting a 100. I only care about what gets me that magic number. With numerical grades, you actually have to try hard at every assignment.

That's actually quite a good point. I think numbers are a lot easier to interpret than letters when it comes to grades.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Additionally, many counties use different grading systems. In some counties, 90 is an A, while in other counties you have to get 94, while 90-93 is a B+.

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

Additionally, many counties use different grading systems. In some counties, 90 is an A, while in other counties you have to get 94, while 90-93 is a B+.

I see. Yeah, it could cause confusion. I think numerical grades are superior. They're easier to interpret and I would imagine are pretty much standardised.

 

[ballin4life]

Numerical grades are not any more standardized than letter grades. Getting a 95 in one class may be way easier than getting a 95 in another class.

 

[KrazyGlue]

True, but that's something that is much harder to fix. Using letter grades only increases the amount of error. A student with an 89.5 in one county can have a better letter grade than a student with a 93.49 in another county. Students within the same county can get equal letters whether they get an 89.5 or a 100.

 

[ballin4life]

Yes, but it may be that getting an 89.5 in the one county is harder than getting a 93.49 in the other. You never really know.

I've been in classes where a 60% was an A on a test. How can this be handled with numerical grades? Should all teachers have to implement some sort of curve system? What about outliers then? For example if the average score on a test is a 60 then one outlier scoring a 95 will cause everyone to fail.

There's also the issue of subjectively graded assignments - do you expect English teachers to distinguish between a 93 paper and a 94 paper?

I think the letter grade system with pluses and minuses provides plenty of room for evaluating students. I think it also provides a more objective standard - A is outstanding, B is good, C is satisfactory, D is bad, and F is a failure.

 

[Sieguest]

From what I've read between Ballin and Krazy, both systems have a fault that devalues them from fully fulfilling the purpose. In my personal opinion I would lean more towards using a numerical system. I think we can all agree that a written report would be an improvement towards measuring student progress right? With that report covering details of the student's character, the number will provide a more precise point which can much more easily be used by employers or university admissions when selecting the best students to admit.

 

[ballin4life]

Guest would you mind addressing my post #30 about the difficulties of subjective and standardized numerical grading?

 

[Sieguest]

Yes, but it may be that getting an 89.5 in the one county is harder than getting a 93.49 in the other. You never really know.

It coud be. But the same uncertainty could also be held for letter grades. It may be harder to qualify for an A- in one country in comparison to another. We can't really tell there either.

I've been in classes where a 60% was an A on a test. How can this be handled with numerical grades? Should all teachers have to implement some sort of curve system? What about outliers then? For example if the average score on a test is a 60 then one outlier scoring a 95 will cause everyone to fail.

That's why the written report would exist. The teacher can make it known that X assignment carries a different value relative to the number shown. Also there is nothing stopping the teacher from making a relative ratio of your percentage on X assignment to what value it would equate to a value equivalent to how well you really did. Even if we entertain the idea that the latter is not possible, the qualitative report allows teachers to identify things such as what you described to avoid confusion among employers and admissions.

There's also the issue of subjectively graded assignments - do you expect English teachers to distinguish between a 93 paper and a 94 paper?

This level of subjectivity also exists in the letter system too. Where does one draw the line between an A- paper and an A paper.

I think the letter grade system with pluses and minuses provides plenty of room for evaluating students. I think it also provides a more objective standard - A is outstanding, B is good, C is satisfactory, D is bad, and F is a failure.

Both systems have positives and negatives, it's just choosing the lesser of two evils. However considering that we have the qualitative report that can cover discrepancies that affect the grade, then we should go with a more precise system. This makes it easy for admissions offices, employers, and others of the sort to compare candidates for whatever position they are going for.

 

[ballin4life]

A number grading system is not actually more precise if the grades are not standardized (like the SAT or ACT). Employers would not know what a 94 means at one place vs an 85 at another. At least one generally understands that A = outstanding, B = good, etc - plus it's much easier for employers to keep track of what percentage of As a school awards than it is to keep those same statistics for every single number from 0 to 100.

I have no idea what you are saying in response to my point that a numbered grading system would present problems for difficult classes where a 60 would constitute an A. Could you explain?

Also what is wrong with a written report plus letter grades then? And I would rather have such a report be about the individual student than describing trivialities like "Well a 60 is actually a good grade in this class". What if the employer doesn't read that and just says - "oh well looks like he got a 60 - throw this one away".

It's about a million times easier to make a distinction between an A- and an A paper than it is to distinguish a 93 from a 94.

 

[Sieguest]

A number grading system is not actually more precise if the grades are not standardized (like the SAT or ACT). Employers would not know what a 94 means at one place vs an 85 at another. At least one generally understands that A = outstanding, B = good, etc - plus it's much easier for employers to keep track of what percentage of As a school awards than it is to keep those same statistics for every single number from 0 to 100.

Same is said of a letter grading system. A may be outstanding in one particular area, but may only equate to a C in another area. The whole idea of grade inflation is strike against both the letter system and the number system. You can't make an argument the argument highlighted in red in face of that fact.

Standardization is a problem in both systems. Given that, if employers are looking for someone who is capable in a specific area. Then looking at a numerical system proves better. 94 compared to a 93. We'll take the 94. Compared to a letter system. A- compared to A-. You can't see who is better even by the tiniest margin. That makes numerical grading more precise than letter grading.

I have no idea what you are saying in response to my point that a numbered grading system would present problems for difficult classes where a 60 would constitute an A. Could you explain?

I was saying that the written report would cover discrepancies that would occur in situations in which a 60=A. I was also saying that the teacher could use a relative ratio to scale the grades to a number more representative of the "A" earned on that test. I'll use my English class as an example. Whenever we do AP style exams she scales the AP scoring rubric to a 100 point scale instead of the 125 (140?) point scale that the actual AP exam uses.

Also what is wrong with a written report plus letter grades then? And I would rather have such a report be about the individual student than describing trivialities like "Well a 60 is actually a good grade in this class". What if the employer doesn't read that and just says - "oh well looks like he got a 60 - throw this one away".

The report would be about the student. Just because the report describes discrepancies that may occur in grade scaling doesn't mean the report loses it focus. That's like saying "Just because this bike report mentions something about two wheels and handlebars I can consider this report on a bike to be focused more on scooters."

And why would an employer not read that part specifically? Care to explain?

It's about a million times easier to make a distinction between an A- and an A paper than it is to distinguish a 93 from a 94.

Not really. A- and A are just broader terms. You can still have the problem of figuring out where to put a paper that is on the fringe between the two terms just like you would between a 93 and a 94. There is also the idea that I stated earlier. You then make no distinction between the person who did one point better than the other but still fall in the same letter category. Employers looking for able writers want the best. Even though a one point difference is kind of trivial the fact is that it shows that one person is a slightly more able writer than the other, and ultimately becomes a factor in decision making.

 

[ballin4life]

Same is said of a letter grading system. A may be outstanding in one particular area, but may only equate to a C in another area. The whole idea of grade inflation is strike against both the letter system and the number system. You can't make an argument the argument highlighted in red in face of that fact.

Yes, but my entire point is that using a numbered system magnifies these differences because there is NO objective standard of A = outstanding, B = good, etc. There is some standardization to the letter system, andthere is less standardization to the number system. And again, it is much more difficult for an outsider to keep track of how many students got 94s, how many students got 93s, how many students got 92s, etc than it is to keep track of how many got As, Bs, etc.

Standardization is a problem in both systems. Given that, if employers are looking for someone who is capable in a specific area. Then looking at a numerical system proves better. 94 compared to a 93. We'll take the 94. Compared to a letter system. A- compared to A-. You can't see who is better even by the tiniest margin. That makes numerical grading more precise than letter grading.

I'm inclined to think that the difference between a 93 and a 94 is negligible. And it's not really more precise when it is so much harder for teachers to grade if they have to worry about correctly curving every assignment or distinguishing between a 93 essay and a 94 essay (more on this below).

I was saying that the written report would cover discrepancies that would occur in situations in which a 60=A. I was also saying that the teacher could use a relative ratio to scale the grades to a number more representative of the "A" earned on that test. I'll use my English class as an example. Whenever we do AP style exams she scales the AP scoring rubric to a 100 point scale instead of the 125 (140?) point scale that the actual AP exam uses.

It's much easier to have a consistent curve when you are taking a test that is already standardized like the AP test. Plenty of teachers write their own tests and give different tests each year. They don't have a good way to standardize these, so when they curve it there's a risk of either grade inflation (curving to some really low score) or grade deflation (curving to a really high score). And once again, outliers are an issue. When the average score is a 60, and the teacher curves it to 75, suddenly the outlier that got a 90 gets a ridiculous 120. Remember that there is some luck to these tests, in terms of studying the right things, having your guesses be correct, etc. I'd rather have a simple grading system where that outlier just gets an A+ rather than having the exact size of his grade skew the average for all his other grades.

The report would be about the student. Just because the report describes discrepancies that may occur in grade scaling doesn't mean the report loses it focus. That's like saying "Just because this bike report mentions something about two wheels and handlebars I can consider this report on a bike to be focused more on scooters."

How long is this supposed to be? You could write a book about grading and student performance. I would much rather have such a report be mainly about the student to describe things that don't show up in a grade like personality, work ethic, etc.

And why would an employer not read that part specifically? Care to explain?

Employers are busy. Most of them don't read cover letters and only look at your resume for ~1 minute. When they see a numerical grade of 85, they have no idea what that means. I have been in classes where 85 was an A+, and I have been in classes where everyone got above 85.

Letter grades aren't perfect in that respect, but you at least know that a 3.7 GPA is pretty good at that given school.

Not really. A- and A are just broader terms. You can still have the problem of figuring out where to put a paper that is on the fringe between the two terms just like you would between a 93 and a 94. There is also the idea that I stated earlier. You then make no distinction between the person who did one point better than the other but still fall in the same letter category. Employers looking for able writers want the best. Even though a one point difference is kind of trivial the fact is that it shows that one person is a slightly more able writer than the other, and ultimately becomes a factor in decision making.

A 1 point factor becomes pointless because it might just be that the teacher was in a slightly better mood that day. It is much easier to be consistent when you have fewer possible grades to worry about assigning. Ever wonder why they don't grade the SAT essay on a scale from 1-100? It's because it is easier to be consistent if you only have to grade on a scale from 1-6.

My entire point is that there is some idea of an objective standard where A is outstanding, B is good, etc. Now, what is outstanding varies from school to school and class to class, but it is much easier to compensate for this than it is to do the same for a numbered system simply because the number system is more complicated.

 

[Sieguest]

Yes, but my entire point is that using a numbered system magnifies these differences because there is NO objective standard of A = outstanding, B = good, etc. There is some standardization to the letter system, andthere is less standardization to the number system. And again, it is much more difficult for an outsider to keep track of how many students got 94s, how many students got 93s, how many students got 92s, etc than it is to keep track of how many got As, Bs, etc.

I see your point. However I still disagree with their being some standardization to letter grades with A= outstanding and B= good and so on. As I said earlier, the presence of grade inflation strikes any notion of standardization in any case. As long as the fact that A=C exists not even letter grades can claim to have more standardization than numerical grades.

I'm inclined to think that the difference between a 93 and a 94 is negligible. And it's not really more precise when it is so much harder for teachers to grade if they have to worry about correctly curving every assignment or distinguishing between a 93 essay and a 94 essay (more on this below).

One can always make the difference. 1 point from meeting a certain criteria. 1 "point" from making an A+ among other things.
Also difficulty has nothing to do with precision in the way you say. It would be more difficult for teachers to be precise in a numerical method but they would still be precise more so than broader terms such as letter grades.

It's much easier to have a consistent curve when you are taking a test that is already standardized like the AP test. Plenty of teachers write their own tests and give different tests each year. They don't have a good way to standardize these, so when they curve it there's a risk of either grade inflation (curving to some really low score) or grade deflation (curving to a really high score). And once again, outliers are an issue. When the average score is a 60, and the teacher curves it to 75, suddenly the outlier that got a 90 gets a ridiculous 120. Remember that there is some luck to these tests, in terms of studying the right things, having your guesses be correct, etc. I'd rather have a simple grading system where that outlier just gets an A+ rather than having the exact size of his grade skew the average for all his other grades.

Grade inflation and deflation isn't applicable to curves in the way that you're using it. (You also got the terms backwards if I interpreted your post right). GI and GD are comparisons over time. Kid A scores X on an assignment. One year later Kid B scores X+2 on the same assignment with the exact same work done as Kid A. Now if on that test you mentioned average score is 60 and after the curve it is 75 one year. And the next year the average score is 60 and after the curve it is 76 then you have Grade Inflation.

As to the other point you assert that's exactly why I said "you can make the discrepancy known in the written report" that way something like the situation you just described doesn't happen.

How long is this supposed to be? You could write a book about grading and student performance. I would much rather have such a report be mainly about the student to describe things that don't show up in a grade like personality, work ethic, etc.

It's not a book long, but it's not a skimpy paragraph either. The bulk would be about study habits, work ethic, etc. But it doesn't take much to make note of the discrepancy in the grading period.

Employers are busy. Most of them don't read cover letters and only look at your resume for ~1 minute. When they see a numerical grade of 85, they have no idea what that means. I have been in classes where 85 was an A+, and I have been in classes where everyone got above 85.

Letter grades aren't perfect in that respect, but you at least know that a 3.7 GPA is pretty good at that given school.

Given that case... they could be mislead if they saw an A+ when in actuality the work was really poor but "excellent" in terms of that area. The problem of being mislead applies to both systems as well as demonstrated earlier.

Well if an 85 was an A+ and there were others that made above 85. Then how do employers determine the more capable of that group from the less capable with just a letter grade and the written report. Seeing as how employers "don't read over cover letters" then I would assume that they would not be able to. Whereas with a numerical grade they would be able to.

A 1 point factor becomes pointless because it might just be that the teacher was in a slightly better mood that day. It is much easier to be consistent when you have fewer possible grades to worry about assigning. Ever wonder why they don't grade the SAT essay on a scale from 1-100? It's because it is easier to be consistent if you only have to grade on a scale from 1-6.

Same could happen with the fringe factor of A- and A. It may be easier to use broad terms, but you won't get the precision that detailed terms give, despite the increase in difficulty to reach this precision.

My entire point is that there is some idea of an objective standard where A is outstanding, B is good, etc. Now, what is outstanding varies from school to school and class to class, but it is much easier to compensate for this than it is to do the same for a numbered system simply because the number system is more complicated.

And I'm saying that there is no objectivity to either letter or numerical grades. If it is possible for Outstanding=Poor over an area then there is no objective standard to even letter grades. Then it comes down to choosing the lesser of two evils. I'd rather choose one that is more accurate in displaying student to student comparisons for employers.

Edit: Also before one jumps at me saying "math and science grades could be objective because those kinds of subjects have definite answers". That wouldn't be true. The quality of education makes a difference here (the quality of education is also one facter in GI and GD). Evidenced in one of the links I posted in the sources section of the OP. (It wasn't a hyperlink because I can't have hyperlinks in my work cited. But here it is. Granted the article was published in 1994, the general ideas presented in it still contain relevance today.) Didn't really think of pointing this out until after I reread some earlier posts.

 

[ballin4life]

Yes, every criticism I levy at numerical grades could also be levied at letter grades. But what I am really asking is which system is MORE likely to have these sorts of problems, and then explaining why I think numerical grading will have more of these problems.

You can't just say "this applies to letter grades too" because that's not my point. My point is that it is less likely to apply to letter grades compared to numerical grades.

I also didn't reverse the terms grade inflation (by which I mean getting a higher grade than you "deserve" - your grade is inflated from what it should be) and grade deflation (the opposite). When I said curve to a score, I mean set the assignment out of that amount. So your AP teacher curved to a score of 100 (thus curving to a lower score will result in higher grades and vice versa). Just pointing that out

Let me clarify about employers - they often do not read cover letters, so how are they supposed to read a written evaluation from every single class you ever took just to understand the meaning of the grades? The way things often work now is that they will look at your GPA and look at what school and major it is from and make a decision based on those. So if you are a general studies major from a state school your GPA won't be as impressive as if you are an engineering major from MIT.

 

[Sieguest]

Been busy. Sorry for late response.

Yes, every criticism I levy at numerical grades could also be levied at letter grades. But what I am really asking is which system is MORE likely to have these sorts of problems, and then explaining why I think numerical grading will have more of these problems.

I actually believe that neither system is more likely to encounter the problems than another. I do now see how you could argue that the systems encounter these problems on different levels. Given that though it seems the trade off is about even. Each outdoes the other in some area. In my opinion I would rather take a more precise number than a broad term, but given your arguments for why a letter system would be better I can see how it works too. From how I now see it, it basically comes down to the question: "How precise does it need to be?"

You can't just say "this applies to letter grades too" because that's not my point. My point is that it is less likely to apply to letter grades compared to numerical grades.

They are equally likely to occur, they just occur on different levels. Which gives one the advantage over the other in some areas and vice versa.

I also didn't reverse the terms grade inflation (by which I mean getting a higher grade than you "deserve" - your grade is inflated from what it should be) and grade deflation (the opposite). When I said curve to a score, I mean set the assignment out of that amount. So your AP teacher curved to a score of 100 (thus curving to a lower score will result in higher grades and vice versa). Just pointing that out

Oh okay I get what you're saying now. However, I don't see how my teacher actually curved the grade. If she scaled it proportionately then the percentage of questions answered right never changed.

Let me clarify about employers - they often do not read cover letters, so how are they supposed to read a written evaluation from every single class you ever took just to understand the meaning of the grades? The way things often work now is that they will look at your GPA and look at what school and major it is from and make a decision based on those. So if you are a general studies major from a state school your GPA won't be as impressive as if you are an engineering major from MIT.

That's exactly a detriment I mentioned in the essay, though I didn't really apply it to employers. Just looking at someone's GPA can be grossly misleading. The qualitative essay is a supplement to make sure employers aren't mislead by strictly GPAs or grades. If the employer doesn't read it, then it's the risk they take for potentially hiring someone who isn't really what their GPA makes them appear to be. Whether we use a letter grade or numerical grade this idea holds true, and both systems encounter this problem on the same level. The written report is a solution to this.

 

[ballin4life]

What do you mean by you don't see how your teacher actually curved the score? She made it out of 100 instead of whatever.

My point about curving scores is that different classes may have different standards for what is good. In one class, a 90% is good. In another, a 75% is good. By using a fixed numerical system, you would either have to indicate that a 75 is good, or curve everything so that a 75 becomes a 90. The problem with just curving everything is that it can skew the grades due to scaling. Let's say a 75 is a good score, and we want to curve it so that it is 75/80 instead of 75/100. However, now the one outlier who got an 90 gets a ridiculously high score of 113%.

The fact that students can now get ridiculously high scores will skew the whole grading system again. How do we know if a 90 is good when we have another candidate who got a 110?

Overall, I don't think it's more precise, just more confusing. It creates a bunch of situations that you have to adjust for and makes it harder for teachers to grade students. The only benefit is precision, but precision is useless without standardization anyway.

Not to mention that I think the letter grade with plus and minus system is fairly precise anyway. Are you trying to distinguish between the 91% A- and the 93% A-? Is that really a meaningful distinction?