, Research Paper
Why Our Rating System is Important
Contrary to the belief of Arthur Lean, writer of the article The Farce Called Grading, pupils are of course, stupid stupids who must someway be coerced, cajoled, persuaded, threatened, strong-armed into larning. Those few nevertheless, who are non, can travel to college where an award codification is in topographic point, such as New College of USF or Harvey Mudd, and the travesty called scaling will be of no burden to the person. The remainder of the pupils need a system by which academic accomplishment can be measured. After detecting many a high school pupil, it is evident that without a system of scholastic comparing really few would endeavor to larn. What motive would at that place be to read that excess page or two the dark before the large scrutiny? In the universe of scaling, the excess page could intend 20 points on a physics trial. In the unrealistic universe of Lean, nevertheless, that one page which could ensue in the absolute epiphany of the reader, could intend nil, save the written studies of descriptive remarks dependableness, intelligence, and honestness.
Arthur Lean claims that it would be more good to an employer to hold written studies sing certain character
traits of job seekers. This, he states, is more helpful to the employer than say, a B-plus in college algebra. This idea is altogether untrue. Working as a computer technician, I was informed by my employer that the most advantageous part of my application was my advanced level of high school classes and standardized math test scores. Letters of recommendation were disregarded in his statement. In short, any job that requires high levels of thought and logic can be matched with individuals who present high test scores. Any Microsoft employer would quickly argue that evidence of strong computer programming (i.e. grades, original written programming code, previous jobs) are better indicators of expected performance than written letters of characteristic traits, or history of parent-teacher conferences. Arthur Lean is wrong in believing that grades are poor indicators of academic achievement. There is no scenario to support his view that grading is unfavorable to students, except for different professors issuing different grades. However, he failed to mention that grade curves in college classes do well to take care of this problem. Also, Lean easily slanders our process of student comparison, but gives no reasonable alternatives to grading.