Grading on a curve.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

To continue a theme:

Western education has been invariably described as mechanical. That is, when we began to experiment with universal and compulsory enrollment, the idea was that schools were much like factories, and children's minds were much like widgets. Set up a system, provide inputs to that system, and you will get the expected outputs like clockwork. All contrary evidence is ignored, and as the system continues to fail in producing its expected outputs, one arbitrarily creates "standards" that are essentially circular arguments for its own efficacy.

So today, in the day of No Child Left Behind and standardized testing, we are defining education largely as the process of teaching children how to test, and pointing to said tests as proof of efficacy. I make this point in passing, since I've yet to encounter any true resistance to the idea standardized testing is probably the worst idea in history since the Pontiac Aztek.

Now one might pause to think here: is education more like a factory? Can people be produced on-demand, as-desired, according to an empirically-amenable programme of mechanical adjustment? Or is education something else? Is education qualitatively different than producing Model Ts? (Or Pontiac Azteks?)

Now I'm not about to launch off on a no-holds-barred "kids teach themselves" rant or anything. I'm not going to push schools where kids wander about flower fields and discover the science of bees by happenstance. The problem I wish to discuss is the problem of grading. Or rather, not grading. Used to be, back in the good old days, 1/3rd of students failed, by definition. That is, the bottom third just failed because they were the bottom third. Today, of course, we tend to think of a grading curve as a blessing, but what we call a "curve" isn't really a curve at all. College professors will let you know this right quick.

Of course, this was stigmatizing to a degree, but it wasn't nearly so stigmatizing as failure is today. Of course there is no realistic expectation that you will be so good at everything that you will get an A in every class in every field you take. That isn't education, which is also about finding what you're good at. If you failed in some field, well you just didn't go into that field. You could go on to all sorts of other fields if you wanted. And you didn't die in self-flagellation and special-snowflake shame because, goddammit, you wrote a paper and you should get an A for it.

This isn't the kid's fault, of course. Locked within our silly "international competition" of education rankings, we're artificially engineering a culture of "high achievement" so that when some spreadsheet comes out about how the countries rank in education, we can feel good about ourselves and go on with our lives untroubled by the shame of being 17th in math and science! Of course we're not actually doing anything to rectify this. We're just engineering a system which will produce test scores that make us 8th, WHICH IS SO MUCH BETTER!

The problem of stigmatizing failure is now universal. Anyone who fails anything, now fails everything. No longer do we think about a child who failed at trigonometry and think, "Oh he's just not cut out for it." Now we think that's he or she is just a bad student and a bad person. So in our culture of flowery high-achievement we have ironically condemned an entire generation to unrealistic and psychologically damaging expectations.

The point is: not every one gets As at everything. If you think so, you're wrong. If you are one of those "high-achieving" students, you're a silly person living in a fantasy world.

So there.

Comments

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

The Aztek was a great vehicle. Your theory is invalid.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

People who vilify the Aztek have forgotten the Pacer.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Indeed.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I know it's not your real point but do you have an idea that would be better at seeing if schools are doing what they are supposed to do? I believe several have been suggested in the past but I don't remember.

As to the main point, the US has had a take all or nothing culture for a while. Heck, it's the American dream! You think people are going to keep cutting taxes for the rich if they don't have the illusion that someday they are entitled to make it too?

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Not really. I think schools should be left largely to their own devices and school boards, and I'm a liberal who thinks the DoE should go away.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I think we may need to expunge the entire south from the Union if we were to go with that plan.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

It's there whether or not you have a DoE. The Feds can no more change the South than they could change us Yanks.

But this just makes my point: The DoE isn't really about education. It's about cultural bru-ha-has. But frankly, I don't care about reforming the South. You ain't gonna change it. You ain't gonna fix it. It's that whole "delusions of efficacy" again.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

No I am simply worried about the massive economic crash they'd cause in about a generation and a half.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Let me introduce you to India or China or Scandanavia... fiercely racist countries with economies.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Yes racism is one of the south's many, many problems. Not really the issue I was thinking of, but it is one.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

It's also a problem in the North.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I hear mars is a pretty racist free place, for now.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

I dunno, fucking ice caps.

[kawaiimamimi.livejournal.com]

Have you ever read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers? It has some absolutely fascinating theories on why the math test schools in the west are so different from the ones in the east. Very interesting stuff.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Reading? What is this reading you speak of?

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

That's not what an autodidact is.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Yes, you did. Do you consider yourself an autodidact?

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

You've got to be the touchiest commenter this side of Appalachia.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I've never met someone online so thoroughly scandalized by someone telling them they're wrong or that they disagree. It's ok man. You'll get through it.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

I'm not attempting to belittle people. But autodidacts don't learn "their own bullshit."

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

So you stand by your assertion that autodidacts learn "their own bullshit?"

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

I see.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

It doesn't look like he made that assertion, so how could he stand by it?

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Become an autodidact. If what you learn is going to be bullshit it might as well be your own bullshit rather than someone else's.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

After the chart in your previous post and your churlish claims that it was 100% scientific, accusing someone else of being childish and insincere rings a bit hollow.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

What history would that be there, oh King of the Frozen Threads. How many times have I been suspended from this community? Oh that's right, zero.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

It's a sweet sensation, I suspect you'd realize once you've tasted the forbidden fruit of Frost! Otherwise I have no other explanation why the same people keep bringing it upon themselves over and over! Once you go frosty-freezy, you'd beg for more of the same! :-P

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

It is if you've filled your own head with bullshit. "the show where everything's made up and the points don't matter"

[danalwyn.livejournal.com]

The problem with grading in the current system is that toughening up on grading is going to mean largely removing parent and taxpayer influence from the education system - public and private (the threat of parents switching schools is still a strong one for private schools). And that's a political fight that will not go very well for anyone.

On another note, grading from a curve was always a form of lunacy in the first place, even when it was done on the 1/3 failure rate (or 20% or whatever - depends on the shape of your curve). Grading should represent competency, not class rank. Trying to figure out if someone has earned their A is just as bad as looking at someone who got an F on a Bell curve and wondering if that means they don't know the subject, or that they just weren't quite as good as the rest of their class. I get disgruntled when people start talking about moving grading back to a curve, as it just seems to replace one arbitrary standard with another.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Any standard is arbitrary, sure. The idea isn't finding people "who know the subject", but finding "those who know it the best". People are a renewable resource.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

And they go well with fava beans.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

And a glass of Chianti.

[danalwyn.livejournal.com]

Well, there is also is basic competency. As a prospective employer there are fields where I want someone who is the best, and then there are fields where I just want someone who demonstrates basic competency. When I look at someone's grades I might be looking for someone who is very good at something like writing and communication, but only knows enough math to keep track of basic quantities. Or I might want the reverse.

There's something to be said for grading on the old "A-C-F" system. We want to find students who are exceptional in a given field, but we also want to guarantee a basic competency in other students. I haven't been such a fan of the "exceptional-only" systems.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

You could do it militarily.

The top 24% garduate, everyone else repeats the grade. ;)

[caerbannogbunny.livejournal.com]

Umm...

Doesn't the military still use a "demonstrate proficiency" method of evaluation where it's a combination of academic tests, hands-on evaluations, and assessments on behavior by peers and/or leadership to determine whether or not a member passes a particular course?

I mean, that makes sense when you have some idea of what you need out of a person who graduates a particular military course. A medic who has demonstrated a reasonable amount of medical knowledge, demonstrated the ability to start IV's and do CPR, and a soldier who doesn't have major discipline problems in such a situation.

Then again, if they screw up too bad and can't seem to get it, they either kick them to the street or they send them to an "easier" course...

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Yes they do, I was being a little tongue in cheak there.

I was thinking about the various candidacy programs wherein the top perfomers in a given class get the job and everyone else either repeats or has to drop.

[caerbannogbunny.livejournal.com]

Good point.

But most of the time, it's a repeat at a later date while they go do something else.

*grin*

Maybe works for college, but high school, not so much.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

I'm not going to push schools where kids wander about flower fields and discover the science of bees by happenstance.

All of a sudden, I so want to wander around flower fields and discover the science of bees by happenstance.

But no.....

[737-700.livejournal.com]

I probably really messed up the scores for my schools on the standardized tests, I used to just guess. I hate those things with a passion, and being me, I just randomly filled in the scantron sheet.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

The problem of stigmatizing failure is now universal.
Stigmatizing failure wouldn't be a problem if it were not universal. It would be an educational option. The problem is really a universal education system, centrally controlled by faceless bureaucrats in total isolation from the reality of classroom, students and the real life needs of graduates. Artificially engineering a culture is bound to produce this type of result.
A more decentralized system offering choices to parents and students, including better options for charter schools, private schools, and yes, even home schooling, might be the solution.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

[yelena-r0ssini.livejournal.com]

What about the fact that lots of academics-based college scholarships (NHS, etc.) require high grades across the board? Part of the reason that failure is not an option for the kids these days is not just that they're being coddled and deluded, but that they have to have consistently extremely high grades in order to get into and pay for college. Now here we could go back into the discussion of whether everyone should be pursuing a college degree, but what about your hypothetical trig-failing kid - what if he's a superb writer, wants to get an English degree, but can't gain admission and/or adequate financial aid because of that F he got in trig? If we're going to fix the "culture of flowery high-achievement" we have to make sure that we address this aspect of the problem.

That said, I prefer absolute arbitrary standards to relative arbitrary standards. Do we need to bring back academic failure? Sure. But I dislike curve-based grading because I want to know whether my work was up to the standards of the course, not whether it was better than that of a given percentage of people who happen to be in the class with me that semester.