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.
I don't agree. How many lawyers, doctors, engineers, architects, mathematicians, non-coder IT types, CPAs etc. do you know who were not also good to great students? Per law and medical schooling in particular being an excellent student is a prerequisite to winning a professional school slot.
ETA - Further, if we divide earners into ranked quintiles the top earning quintile is also the best educated.
Biden was a poor student, but he earned a law degree and is now president. Same with Obama. There is at least one professor who frequently posts here who was a poor student (although you did not mention professors). I'm an engineer, and the majority of my colleagues were poor students, and their careers have been more successful than mine.
What I recommended in another thread is some sort of national standards for grading that all teachers, nationwide, must follow, and any teachers who refuse to follow the standards should be fired, even if they have tenure. But, of course, nobody on this forum agreed. God forbid there is any check and balance against an almighty teacher's power.
That's already been done: the god-awful Common Core. It caused lots of problems and solved none. For instance, a CC math textbook insists that multiplying 2 * 5 is NOT the same as multiplying 5 * 2. The Commutative Property is one of the first things taught to kids in math, at least outside the bizarro world. And yet, Common Core teachers actually take off points for applying it. A few of them caught heat from parents for doing that, and deservedly so.
Biden was a poor student, but he earned a law degree and is now president. Same with Obama. There is at least one professor who frequently posts here who was a poor student (although you did not mention professors). I'm an engineer, and the majority of my colleagues were poor students, and their careers have been more successful than mine.
Also an engineer, as long as you were able to secure the degree, whether you were top of the class or average student, in most cases has little to do with how successful you are within your enterprise. At least in my industry, the really gifted students that got PhDs and are technically brilliant tend to end up in senior technical roles, not in leadership roles. A senior technical fellow or scientist is a fantastic accomplishment, but have a look at how many PhDs end being Vice President or CEO. Not so many.
That's already been done: the god-awful Common Core. It caused lots of problems and solved none. For instance, a CC math textbook insists that multiplying 2 * 5 is NOT the same as multiplying 5 * 2. The Commutative Property is one of the first things taught to kids in math, at least outside the bizarro world. And yet, Common Core teachers actually take off points for applying it. A few of them caught heat from parents for doing that, and deservedly so.
That was clearly a poorly implemented set of standards, but it doesn't mean that standards are not needed. Are you suggesting that the current system, where grades are basically a random lottery of who gets the easier teachers, is the best system? I'm sure you'll say "life isn't fair". But do you really want your doctor to simply be whoever was the winner of the "life isn't fair" lottery, rather than the best person for the job?
I am obviously not suggesting getting rid of the commutative property. What I am suggesting is maybe universal policies as to how to deal with absences for exams or how to deal with spelling errors on exams, and maybe some criteria as to how many students get which grade. Can you really say it's the best system where, for the same class at the same school, with different teachers, one teacher gives literally every student an A, and one teacher gives literally nobody an A?
Biden was a poor student, but he earned a law degree and is now president. Same with Obama. There is at least one professor who frequently posts here who was a poor student (although you did not mention professors). I'm an engineer, and the majority of my colleagues were poor students, and their careers have been more successful than mine.
In engineering, "poor" student is a relative term.
That was clearly a poorly implemented set of standards, but it doesn't mean that standards are not needed. Are you suggesting that the current system, where grades are basically a random lottery of who gets the easier teachers, is the best system? I'm sure you'll say "life isn't fair". But do you really want your doctor to simply be whoever was the winner of the "life isn't fair" lottery, rather than the best person for the job?
I am obviously not suggesting getting rid of the commutative property. What I am suggesting is maybe universal policies as to how to deal with absences for exams or how to deal with spelling errors on exams, and maybe some criteria as to how many students get which grade. Can you really say it's the best system where, for the same class at the same school, with different teachers, one teacher gives literally every student an A, and one teacher gives literally nobody an A?
I don't know. It's a complicated question. But I'm pretty sure a universal nationwide set of grading criteria won't fly in the Woke-istan we've made our country into. Because whatever set of criteria is implemented, someone's bound to complain about it. Perhaps it's marginally more fair to let school districts, rather than individual teachers, create a grading system. This could be especially helpful in higher grades, where students switch classrooms between subjects, so that one subject in the same grade level isn't graded harder than another. (Unless it's a class like art or gym, where participation, rather than quality of output, is a priority.)
Also an engineer, as long as you were able to secure the degree, whether you were top of the class or average student, in most cases has little to do with how successful you are within your enterprise. At least in my industry, the really gifted students that got PhDs and are technically brilliant tend to end up in senior technical roles, not in leadership roles. A senior technical fellow or scientist is a fantastic accomplishment, but have a look at how many PhDs end being Vice President or CEO. Not so many.
Probably most good technical people wouldn't consider VP or CEO to be a success. As one who got pulled kicking and screaming into management, it's a miserable existence. I advise our younger engineers every day to be very sure which path they want to follow.
I've heard from professor friends that one reason so many professors don't actually "retire" once they "retire" is now they can finally do the work they wanted to do without being distracted by all the administrivia that comes with professorship. The work becomes fun again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MillennialUrbanist
I don't know. It's a complicated question. But I'm pretty sure a universal nationwide set of grading criteria won't fly in the Woke-istan we've made our country into. Because whatever set of criteria is implemented, someone's bound to complain about it. Perhaps it's marginally more fair to let school districts, rather than individual teachers, create a grading system. This could be especially helpful in higher grades, where students switch classrooms between subjects, so that one subject in the same grade level isn't graded harder than another. (Unless it's a class like art or gym, where participation, rather than quality of output, is a priority.)
Ironically, when I went through school, as did my kids, quality of output was what was graded in gym and art.
Ironically, when I went through school, as did my kids, quality of output was what was graded in gym and art.
My schools, both K-thru-8 and high school, were like I described. While quality did improve your grade, it wasn't a major part of it. (This was before "everyone got a participation trophy"; that started after I graduated.) What teachers expected was for you to participate in the class activity. That is, if the tree you were painting in watercolors at least looked like a tree, and if you at least acted like you were playing soccer with the class, you were pretty much guaranteed a C for that day. So even if you totally stunk at everything, but at least tried, you'd still get a C at the end. Not the best grade, but decent enough not to ding your GPA too much. You'd only get a failing grade if you totally refused to participate and/or sat out all the time.
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.
The Commutative Property is one of the first things taught to kids in math, at least outside the bizarro world. And yet, Common Core teachers actually take off points for applying it. A few of them caught heat from parents for doing that, and deservedly so.
