Even with such a system I found an amount of sorting coming
through with the grading. You would have A work, A+ work, A++
work etc.. As a product of American society, I always have to
fight seeing difference as some sort of sorting. I think this
problem is much deeper than grading and goes to the heart of the
question of diversity. One of the arguments against
multicultural education is it is teaching our children to be
ashamed of being Americans. What the arguments are actually
saying is we are not teaching our children that American or
western culture is superior to the others. It seems to me that
the grading question is connected to the diversity one, and that
we can not truly address the grading one without first
addressing the diversity one.
I enjoyed Michael E. Erickson chair article, so am resubmitting
it for those who have difficulty with attachements.
Nate
A De-grading Plus/Minus Fable
Michael E. Erickson
Once there was a chair factory whose artisans took pride in
their art. Because the chairs stood-up well in the marketplace,
the kingdom recognized the chairs as superior products. But
alas, each term the chair factory could only produce a limited
number of A-1 chairs. In fact, no chair was turned out before
its time.
Then came MASS PRODUCTION. Chairs were turned out at the end of
each term, regardless of their state of completeness. To
enhance its rapidly deteriorating reputation, the chair factory
decided to emulate the local college. Instead of allowing the
kingdom to rate the quality of the chairs, the factory decided
to have its workers grade the chairs from A through F,
traditionally.
A chairs were still considered the top-of-the-line, even when
these chairs were graded on the curve. B chairs, although of
good quality, were not as well infused as the A class of
chairs. Structurally speaking, these B chairs had a few loose
screws. The C chairs were considered of a gentlemans grade.
The D chairs were barely passable. It was hoped that these D
chairs would end up in a discount outlet. The F chairs had a
difficult time standing, but this did not bother a few of the
workers. Those few workers felt that the F chairs were not
materielle pour fauteuil, shoddy workmanship was to be
expected.
As time passed, it was decided that a B chair with only one
screw loose was not comparable to a B chair missing a few
screws. So a committee of workers formed to create more
categories in order to increase the reliability of the screw
loose grading system. After much deliberation, it was decided
that adding +s and s to the traditional system of grading
chairs was needed. Expense was to be no object.
In this new grading system A chairs were still top-of-the-line.
A- chairs, although excellent, were not actually A chairs in
terms of their quality points; however, neither were B- , C-, or
D- chairs really what they were made out to be. B+ and B chairs
were still good chairsgive or take a few screws; and C+ and C
chairs were still acceptable products. The lesser-graded
chairs, missing a little backing, bolts, and bottoms, were
passable. Needless to say, the Fd chairs still couldnt stand
alone.
Well, the chair factory is still in the business of
mass-producing A through F chairsplus or minus. The
turned-out chairs are seen in every walk of life. Some are
department chairs while others, known as high chairs, hold seats
of distinction. At times, its difficult to ascertained which
chairs were originally A chairs and which chairs were F but
could have been A chairs, if only they had been screwed
properly.