Success in Education

Wolff describes the process of grading as somewhat of a necessary evil. He states that all American students define themselves in a world or grades where some see grades as harassment and other see them as an incentive or as a reward for their competitiveness. Some students develop great anxiety over their grades and others seem to relish in their accomplishments and their attainments. Another negative that Wolff describes is that teachers whose job it is to assess and grade students are often confused on why they give grades at all.
This reading really made me wonder why grades are needed at all if there are so many negative consequences. Wolff goes on to explain that there are 3 specific kinds of grading; criticism, evaluation and ranking. Criticism is basically the analysis of something that identifies faults and re-enforces the positive attributes of a work product. Evaluation is the act of assigning a grade to something such as pass, fail or A, B, C, D or F. These marks express the teacher's judgement of the student's work. One flaw with this is that specific performance may not be able to be pin pointed exactly on a linear scale. There may be a huge gap in excellence of performance between A and B but only a marginal gap between a B and high C. Another thing is that it may be difficult to grade or assess a piece of work past a certain level of technical skill because style, interpretation, or finesse may be considered more of a matter of taste. The third type of grading is ranking. Ranking produces the greatest amount of anxiety with students and also is at the center of the most opposition. One problem with this system is that this ordinal ranking does not really show how much better one student is over another. You may have a group of twenty students and all of them may be separated by less than a point. I know that our Valedictorian and Salutatorian were separated by thousandths of a point.
The difference between evaluation and ranking is that evaluation establishes a relationship between each student and an objective scale of measurement. The performances of students do not affect one another and it's possible for every person to rank high on the scale or to fail. One way that evaluations are done by teachers are on a bell curve. Using this method of evaluation, the grade levels are assigned after the students have been evaluated. A problem with this method is that it provides no clue to the level of performance signified by a particular grade. Typically teachers want a large number of low and high passes and smaller number of failing grades.
Criticism, evaluation and ranking all serve entirely distinct functions in the process and institutions of education. Criticism is at the heart of education and Wolff describes it as the only way to learn. One must learn to put all of oneself into their work and submit the result to criticism. He also explains that some educational rebels believe that subjective feeling is the criterion of success in education. What counts is what the student feels about his own work or performance. These rebels believe that other's criticism is harmful and may shape a child based on what the teacher wants. Wolff states that there is some truth in these rebels beliefs because this criticism leads to education being repressive and learning is rote memorization and creativity's are quieted. However, Wolff also states that these students who are never subjected to criticism who enjoy a free environment where expression is welcome, also never learn to deal with criticism.
Wolff says that the task of grading undergraduate students is irrelevant to education and sometimes harmful. The debate is that some students who excel in their major area are committed students but who fail at other studies may not pass or qualify for professional studies where a student who has only average performance across the board may be accepted at a professional school. In my opinion, I feel that this goes against what a professional is. I believe that the school would prefer the student who has a genuine commitment to a single field over a student who may have merely met degree requirements.
Wolff also explains that ranking performs a function which is neither professional or educational. The purpose of ranking is to facilitate the allocation of resources. Since there is not unlimited money for scholarships, ranking students solves this problem. Another problem that ranking solves is when the demand for a spot in a particular school is greater than the supply. The highest ranked receive these resources or awards or positions in these schools. Wolff also goes on to explain that ranking serves no other intellectual, cultural, social, spiritual, psychological or educational purpose. When students go out into the world, the top positions are awarded to those that were able to get in to the most desirable schools and who graduated at the top of their class. Wolff asks, "Are those places (schools) so desirable or is the endless competition a struggle for illusionary rewards?" He then states that the rewards are very real and they are for those who make it to the top. The "desired" colleges really do offer better education,the students are brighter, the faculty is more exciting and the physical surroundings are more pleasant. In the American education system, to the victor goes the spoils. I don't believe that there will be a way to remove the process of evaluation and ranking from education as long as there are colleges that offer better education or even as long as some professional positions offer better pay. As long as there is wealth, power and status to compete for in American society, I believe ranking and evaluation will continue to have a place in our education system.