| |
SamanthaWishmanFirstPaper 1 - 16 Feb 2012 - Main.SamanthaWishman
|
|
> > |
META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
Should I adopt the credit-fail grading system?
-- By SamanthaWishman - 16 Feb 2012
Do you know what the curve is like?
I was an English major at a big, bad, greed-is-good university where American Psycho was aspirational and “finance” was a pickup line. My mom liked to tell me I was living in the 80s.
The young captains of industry who went to the best undergraduate business program in the country often turned up their noses at those of us in the College of Arts and Sciences. They would scoff: Humanities! The College of Arts and Crafts! Do you know, they would ask with brass, what a Wharton curve is like?
I did not. I took two Wharton classes and refused to be graded in either of them for fear of subjecting my sensitive liberal arts soul to the monsters in the Tower of Greed (what English majors poetically called the business school).
One day before my 19th Century Satire class, a few students got to talking. We were tired of the degradation, tired of the name-calling. I hate it when they call them Mickey Mouse classes, we bemoaned. We wanted respect. I naively said we needed a curve.
What does the curve teach?
Aside from wanting the poor students of the humanities to get the credit they deserve, it also seemed a disgusting waste for so many bright young minds pursuing disparate fields to be preoccupied with hierarchy at the cost of seeking out what could be achieved together. Part of me hoped that a curve in the College classes would be a way to get beyond that hang-up. Of course, even with uniform grading the business school students could still find a way to assert their superiority since Wharton ranked higher than the College in the U.S. News & World Report.
We live in a country where the total assets of the top 400 people equal the assets of the bottom 140 million people, where 46.2 million people live in poverty, and where the imbalance between college completion by rich and poor students has grown over 50% since the 1980s. In the heat of media coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement, the young captains of industry chanted in the lobby of the Tower of Greed: Get a job. Occupy Occupy Wall Street. We are the 1%. I wonder how much the teachings of the curve helped to justify this position.
Questions of rank do not inspire worthwhile conversations, but they do inspire students to unquestioningly affirm the value and inevitability of competition and order. In describing the effect of curve grading in his article, “Law School as Training for Hierarchy,” Duncan Kennedy asserts that the process of subjecting students to a system of hierarchy and of student acquiescence to being placed in relation to each other assimilates graduates to future hierarchical systems.
For what do we educate?
I was on a panel of young alumnae from my all-girls high school to answer the question of how to educate young women to be prepared for the business world. We said the school was too indulgent and too encouraging. The world is tough and competitive and you have to fight for yourself. So, if you want to help these young women, get them to wise up.
Kennedy argues that curved grading is unnecessary if the goal of legal education is to provide high quality legal services. A reallocation of resources could provide a majority of law students with the technical proficiency that only a minority of students currently receive. During law school admissions programs students and administration explained why the curve was necessary: so employers will know how to differentiate us. If that is the end, then the curve is the means.
Are law school administrators and professors allies or adversaries? Should law school prepare us for the world as it is or to change it?
How do I best learn?
After my first semester at law school the curve told me that my exam performance was average to below average in a pool of above-average students. The grades I got didn’t help me learn, but perhaps higher grades next semester would give me assurance of progress, in case I couldn’t see progress on my own.
I did not know until reading Harry’s essay that we can opt out of grading through J.D. Rule 3.1.2. What would be the impact of not subjecting myself to evaluation by one professor on one exam? Would a firm look down on me for opting out of grades-- either suspicious that the grades were bad or suspicious of a wayward soul? If they didn’t appreciate my decision, is that somewhere I would want to work? In terms of my own education, I could no longer be motivated by the hope of affirmation that follows feelings of superiority that the curve can provide. I imagine that I would be a happy and liberated law student, or at least have one less reason not to be.
Is opting out of curved grading freedom? Or, does freedom come by learning how to transcend grades and ranking? That could be a useful lesson. If law school is a test of the imagination, perhaps grades are part of the test.
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list. |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| |