Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's like saying kids who are not good at athletics should be excused from phys ed or those who don't do well in math shouldn't have to take math.
No it's not. That would be saying that kids who don't present well should never have to present. I'm trying to make the point that the skill you are being graded on should be the skill you are taking the class for. A math grade or science grade should be based on your knowledge of math, not on your ability to get in front of a bunch of kids and speak (which is nothing like giving a presentation to a group of your professional colleagues). Make a speaking class mandatory and grade them for that, don't just attach it willy nilly to nearly every class a kid has affecting their grades in numerous subjects, even if they have mastery over the subject matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocSciProf
Yes it is fair. You may as well ask is it fair to downgrade Joe's paper because he cannot write even though he knows the stuff. It is fair. We know you know something by your presentation of it. And we know you know it well by your ability to present it in multiple ways to multiple audiences. Whatever the reason, if you can't present it in multiple ways you do not know it well.
So in spite of straight A's in subject matter if someone can't present it orally they don't know it? Sorry, don't agree at all.
He could've turned in a paper, and been judged on how well he knew the topic, by providing references and notations. It doesn't HAVE to be publicly spoken, to show how well the student knows the topic.
All the papers I wrote in college, I didn't have to give oral presentations. Not one time. There were a couple of presentations presented by teams, of which I was a part of, but I didn't do the public speaking. I was in charge of illustrations.
I'm sorry. I'm trying to not offend you. But I, personally, would not be bragging that my college rarely asked me to learn (and coached me to succeed in) a fundamental skill, nor would I be bragging that when a conscientious expert (i.e., professor) in a topic arranged assignments for me to complete that would stretch me, I found a way to weasel out of that part of the assignment. Indeed, I'm sure your first employers would have LOVED to know that was how you dealt with challenge.
Like it or not, oral presentations are fair, and judging someone who presents poorly as less knowledgeable is also fair. Most faculty design courses with multiple ways for students to succeed. And I usually drop the student's lowest grade. But, in the end, the plain fact is this: if you can only present the material in one way--whatever that way is--you just don't know the material. You may think you do, but you don't. I could cite multiple studies on this, but I'll spare you that.
Maybe this'll help. You are about to decide which doctor to use for an important non-elective surgery, for someone you love dearly--your spouse, a child, a parent. Both doctors graduated from top-notch institutions, had the same internships, have done the surgery an equal number of times, cost the same, will have the same support staff, have equally low levels of complaints (even 0 if you want), the same survival rates, and are equal on all other measures.
You meet Dr. One, and she meets your very large family, one of whom asks a question about the surgery. Dr. One is uncomfortable, anxious, and stumbles over the material. BUT YOU'VE READ HER DIAGNOSTIC REPORT! CLEARLY, SHE KNOWS THE STUFF!
You meet Dr. Ace, and she meets your very large family, one of whom asks the same question about the surgery in the same way. Dr. Ace is comfortable, at ease, and easily answers the question. You've read her diagnostic report, and she, too, clearly knows the stuff!
You really think you'd pick Dr. One? Or be indifferent?
Go ahead, pick Dr. One. And tell your large and loving family that's your choice for your husband's or wife's or kid's or parent's surgery. They'll think you've got some murderous intent or are, at the very least, negligent.
Like it or not, that's how things work.
We should give kids a chance to learn the skills that will improve their lives. Just like we have them eat their vegetables. Some things they just gotta do. And it is not only fair, it is IDEAL that we ask them to rise to those challenges now, in a safe environment, before the world drowns them in challenges for which they are (therefore) wholly unprepared.
Last edited by SocSciProf; 09-14-2018 at 04:05 PM..
Reason: Spelling error fix
So in spite of straight A's in subject matter if someone can't present it orally they don't know it? Sorry, don't agree at all.
You can disagree, but, you'd still be wrong.
In some classes to get an A all you need do is hand in homework on time, homework you did while looking at the book, and complete a few multiple choice tests. In some classes all you have to do is write "the" 3-paragraph essay. I have students in my class who think a paper is three paragraphs. And those are students who got A's enough to enter a pretty solid college--and learned how to take standardized tests.
The point isn't for students to get A's. The point is for students to gain capabilities!
If you want to know if someone knows something, you have to see their performance in multiple modalities. Some students are going to be stronger orally, others stronger in writing, others stronger on timed tests. You use as many modalities as you can so all get to shine, and all get challenged. Then you drop the lowest grade to avoid penalizing their transcript. But you don't tell them you'll drop the lowest grade until all assignments are done. And you know that the student who did well on all modalities REALLY knows the material. This is the student I'd be comfortable trusting with some consequential decision that has to be based on the course material. The others know something, but less.
Why is this so hard to appreciate? Why is one kind of assignment "unfair," and another somehow "fair?" Makes no sense.
So if this agenda takes off more wimps will be turned loose into the world and will fall apart at the slightest challenge. All of us have to do things we don’t like or want to do, but must in order to survive and function in society. These types of assignments lay the groundwork for future challenges .
In some classes to get an A all you need do is hand in homework on time, homework you did while looking at the book, and complete a few multiple choice tests. In some classes all you have to do is write "the" 3-paragraph essay. I have students in my class who think a paper is three paragraphs. And those are students who got A's enough to enter a pretty solid college--and learned how to take standardized tests.
The point isn't for students to get A's. The point is for students to gain capabilities!
If you want to know if someone knows something, you have to see their performance in multiple modalities. Some students are going to be stronger orally, others stronger in writing, others stronger on timed tests. You use as many modalities as you can so all get to shine, and all get challenged. Then you drop the lowest grade to avoid penalizing their transcript. But you don't tell them you'll drop the lowest grade until all assignments are done. And you know that the student who did well on all modalities REALLY knows the material. This is the student I'd be comfortable trusting with some consequential decision that has to be based on the course material. The others know something, but less.
Why is this so hard to appreciate? Why is one kind of assignment "unfair," and another somehow "fair?" Makes no sense.
Your whole attitude makes no sense. If public speaking is such a valuable skill, MANDATORY ATTENDANCE in classes SPECIFICALLY AIMED AT TEACHING THAT SKILL should be implemented.
Your idea is totally ath backwards. It is as if a student takes a class in public speaking and is then required to show evidence of advanced mathematical skills without ever having been taught such skills.
We had to do that, too And when we were called on in class, we had to stand up. We were used to having all eyes on us from a very early age.
Kids are pampered and accommodated today. It certainly doesn't prepare them for the real world.
This bring back negative memories of 7th grade geography and 8th grade science. We had to stand repeat the question and give the exact answer, word for word.
I think people are glossing over the part that is about it being unfair to students who don't 'perform' well. Why should a kid with a brilliant history paper get a poor grade because they don't do well with presentations? (I always cried when giving a presentation) Sure if a kid takes speech, debate, foreign language then grades based on presentations make sense, otherwise it shouldn't be a part of the grade.
Good for everyone who sucked it up and somehow had their life made better by being forced to do presentations, but there are a lot of us who only felt humiliated and embarrassed and traumatized. Kids with that level of anxiety aren't likely to gravitate towards careers where public speaking is a necessity, it's pointless to make non essential presentations a part of their grade.
It's no more "unfair to those who don't perform well," than it is unfair to test students who claim they don't "test well."
There seem to be a lot of excuses for poor performance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
