| | |
|
StudentPerceptionsOfTheCurve 5 - 31 Mar 2009 - Main.ScottThurman
|
| | A statement several people made today was that the notion of the grading curve was insulting. They based this (I assume) on the fact that their grades were measured relative to the overall performance of the class, as opposed to an individualized assessment of the quality of the work done. It seems to me, though, that this mistakes the purpose and significance of grades. Grades are not necessarily an evaluation of the specific person's work done, or the effort they put in; this is especially true when the grading format is an anonymous exam.
Instead, the purpose of curving grades is to define relative achievement within the class. Whether or not this is best represented by a single test is another question, but it seems to me that grades are not merely a tool to pat people on the back for a job well done. I remember in college that the most popular classes were those taught by professors who were notorious for easy grading. If everyone gets a good grade though, what does that actually say? A B+ in a class where the average grade is an A should be a lot less meaningful than a B in a class where the average is a C+. The curve eliminates this problem. | | | The important thing is to separate out our objections to the grading curve (viewed as a quota system for each letter grade), from our concerns about the meaninglessness of whatever it is that anonymous final exams end up measuring, and the sort of learning that students do in classes where evaluations are based on a single anonymous final exam. This is I think partly what I was trying to get at in the discussion over at Lauren Rosenberg's Paper. The grading curve and the letter-grade system are both up for grabs, it seems, but the model of evaluating students on the basis of one anonymous exam (to the extent we're evaluated at all under alternative systems) doesn't seem to be up for grabs. Nor does the companion practice of having nearly 100 person Socratic classes for 1Ls.
-- DanielMargolskee - 31 Mar 2009 | |
>
> | Molissa: While at this point I am not terribly wedded to the language of my essay (even if I accidentally drop it into other places), I did mean "artificial" in the sense of "man-made." It may be, as I felt Prof. Moglen was saying today, that grades correspond, for the most part, to real, substantive differences amongst students' performances. In that sense, I do not mean that they are artificial. I mean they are artificial in that the distribution of grades can be changed. I agree that a more accurate term, if not dropping the line of thought altogether, would be preferred.
-- ScottThurman - 31 Mar 2009 |
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
| | |