RE: Grading Alternatives

["Lyle, Dan B." <DBL@CDRH.FDA.GOV>]

As a footnote to John Purchase's recent interesting post on Grades and
Alternatives, our astute moderator counsels keeping in mind the AIM of the
DEN for the subject.

That's an excellent suggestion for the entire scope of the topic.  I've in
the past posted my own experiences with the U.S. educational system:  one of
hating every minute, which includes all the "grades" plus 12 years of
full-time college credit, culminating in a Ph.D. in Biology.

I never really knew why I hated the system so much until (long after having
by some miracle survived it all) I happened into starting to learn about
this "Quality" thing, then focused on Dr. Deming's mind-altering works, then
read and listened to the posts/writings of Dr. Tribus.

I could go on at length about all that, but I won't (I've said it before.)
Instead, I'd suggest going right back to the fundamental approach of Dr.
Deming:  "What's the AIM; by what means are you going to try to achieve your
AIM; and how will you know if you succeed?"

Focusing on grading/evaluation, I think, is missing the mark, a subtle
diversion.  How about backing way off (or going to the most fundamental
level, take your pick) and asking what is the AIM of the American
Educational System?

For those that pay the bills (the ultimate customers), what's the AIM?  How
about to give kids the fundamental knowledge/skill sets to be productive
citizens in our U.S. society?  Anyone argue with that?

Lots of people gripe about the grade-school/high-school results.  In what
regards?  If I'm hearing correctly, the main complaint is from industry:
which says that overall the kids aren't properly prepared to be productive
workers.  In what regards?  Not knowing the names of all the past Presidents
of the U.S.?  Not being able to recite the periodic table?  Not knowing all
the names of all the vessels feeding the brain?  Not being able to work a
complicated algebraic formula?  Not knowing who authored what philosophic
work?

Hmmm.  That's certainly what the great push to "standardized tests" seems to
think is the key result that needs to be achieved.

How about the 4 "R"s?---being able to read well, write well, understand
basic mathematics, and adept at self-learning/innovation?  i.e. skills
really used in, and critical-to, the daily work environment.

Allow me to throw in a bit of my personal experience.  I have taught in
formal and informal environments at the grade school, high school, college,
graduate school, and medical school levels.  Instead of keeping in mind and
putting as top priority the AIM of "give kids the fundamental
knowledge/skill sets to be productive citizens in our U.S. society" my AIM
(in the past) quickly morphed into:  "fill their heads with every fact and
principle I can cram into them on this, the most-fascinating topic that I
myself am fascinated with and am giving a course on."

Standard-Setters?  National and local?  I suspect that industry's
fundamental (and legitimate) complaint also morphs into:  "How much of my
personal interest area can I make a requirement to be stuffed into the kid's
heads?"  And the "standard tests" thus become unrelated to the real overall
AIM, and instead become fact-checkers of how well "teachers" have crammed
transient facts into weary, confused, misled student brains.

When our AIM is corrupted, how can we expect anything further down the line
to be appropriate?

Is not that one of the most profound insights from Dr. Deming?  

I could go on, getting into valid measures of achievement towards the real
AIM (which don't involved grading), but I won't.  This post is long enough
already, and I've made the most important point.

Dan.

--------------------
Dan Lyle, Ph.D.
Research Biologist
FDA/CDRH
301-443-4049
dbl@cdrh.fda.gov
--------------------
============================================================================