Comment Re:Deeper issue that "grading" etc is harmful (Score 2) 296
Thanks for the reply. The value of a grade on the context, which can be complex. Example: "William Lowell Putnam Undergraduate Mathematics Competition 2016 at Rutgers"
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.math.rutgers.edu...
"The exam consists of two parts (morning and afternoon) with 6 problems in each part. Each problem is worth 10 points for a total of 120 points. The exam is very difficult; typically a score of 20 points (2 problems fully correct) is already good enough to be in the top 20% of exam takers. A score of 40 points will probably put you in the top 5%. Grading is very strict. There is very little partial credit given. If your solution is not well written you may earn only 1 or 2 points."
I forget exactly what score I got on the William Lowell Putnam when I took it at sixteen years old. Maybe around 20 or a little less? The university math professors still seemed impressed.
Nobody is saying don't provide timely and useful feedback or even don't keep track of progress. The issue is substituting that for typical numerical grading assigned in a typical class and all the baggage that comes with it.
Related:
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.teachthought.com%2Fp...
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fteaching.berkeley.edu%2F...
"Why do we grade and what are grades for? Although grading is ubiquitous in higher education, both long-standing evidence and continued investigations have revealed that the answer to these questions can be very different across courses and contexts. In recent years, multiple different grading frameworks have emerged with the goal of explicitly designing practices that reflect student learning. In particular, these approaches provide opportunities to give more constructive feedback to students, give the instructor and students reliable information about their learning, and focus on promoting students' intrinsic motivation."
Likewise, nobody is saying don't establish minimum standards for credentialing professionals. The issue is how you go about that.
See for example: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum.facmedicine.com%2F...
"Medical school grades are almost universally given in one of three ways. (It's actually more like two different ways, but I'll get into that later.) The more traditional programs stick to the 4.0, A-F grading scale that you're the most familiar with. That's right, your GPA nightmares will continue to haunt you every time you receive your end of semester grades in medical school. Alternatively, other schools use a binary Passor Fail scale to indicate whether or not you have acquired the minimum knowledge base to... well... err... pass. Pass/Fail medical schools have become increasingly common, but we'll discuss below why this can very misleading.
I found it surprising that more than half of programs in the U.S. claim to be Pass/Fail medical schools, while only less than 20% use the A-F scale. The binary grading system has seemed to take over medical education, as other systems are being phased out. There has to be some benefit, right?
The main advantage to a true Pass/Fail medical school is the perceived lower level of competition between students. Supposedly, if you are not being ranked directly against your peers, and are instead only motivated to properly learn the material, you are more likely to work cooperatively with your fellow students. More importantly, you are theoretically LESS likely to sabotage or otherwise hinder the others in your class if you are not actively competing with them for a higher grade.
More elite medical schools (UCSF, Harvard, Mayo etc.) attract some of the most intelligent and capable students in the world. Ranking their students against one another is counter-productive. We already know that these individuals are the best of the best, and an average student at UCSF is likely a stronger candidate than one of the top students at many other schools (at least that is the idea). In these situations Pass/Fail medical school grading systems make the most sense. However, for students who go to less prestigious schools, class rankings (although stressful) can allow you to stand out.
Additionally, competition is a major stressor on both medical students and residents alike. Residencies in certain specialties are notoriously difficult to obtain, making every exam feel like a potential career ender. Resident performance can also doom your fellowship chances. Every year students and residents are overwhelmed by the pressure put on them to succeed, and every year students drop out or (worse) even commit suicide.
As a student who went to a straight A-F grading medical school, I will give some support to the less competition is better argument. Only a small percentage of students at my program were able to achieve the highest evaluation in each class. Predictably, there was a lot of note hoarding, elite study groups that rejected weaker students, and even (a very small amount) cheating. I had friends who were on the edge of breakdowns due to the performance stress, and Although I do not have first hand experience, I can imaging that a school with no internal ranking system would be more cooperative and congenial. Obviously, there will always be stress and competition (this is medical school after all). However, taking grades out of the picture is probably one of the most effective solutions to combat the competitive atmosphere.
So, given all that, yes, surgeons who graduated from a medical school without A-F grades but instead pass/fail competency tests are probably a good choice.
To see one other flaw in grading, contrast grading and moving on with, say, a "90%" grade with "mastery learning" like Khan Academy encourages:
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdistricts.khanacademy....
"Khan Academy's mastery learning system builds students understanding over time, allowing them to slow down and dig into skills where they need support or skip ahead when they show proficiency.
So, ideally, I want a surgeon who has mastered every needed skill to 100% at some point during their education. Again, in such a situation, what does a "grade" assigned at the end of a course of study mean? If any student does not get 100% eventually on important skills, shouldn't that be a "fail" for the course when you think about it?
Do people need to be given grades when they read books in the library? Do people need to be given grades when they have a hobby? Do people need grades when they do home repairs on their own home? Sure, these are all situations where feedback of some sort form someone else might sometimes be useful. But what would be the value of essentially arbitrary "grades"?
Anyway, a complex nuanced topic. As I see it (informed by John Taylor Gatto, Alfie Kohn, John Holt, Pat Ferenga, Grace Llewelyn and many others), the whole schooling system is broken and has been for a long time -- and it is only getting more broken with advancing technology. I wrote about that in 2007:
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatapata.sourceforge.n...