Although I am starting to tire of Postman's negativity towards technology, I found that he made some valid points towards the defenses we have in place (or don't have in place) in reference to technology and "the information glut." I agree with him that the school and the family serve as part of a culture's information immune system, but I took offense to his statement "that the family can no longer do this is obvious to everyone." I hope this is not true. I have devoted most of my life to trying, as best as I can, to be the "immune system" for my family, and just tonight my teenage son said that I had sheltered them from the world. Thankfully, my college-aged daughter said she hadn't felt sheltered, but irregardless, I tried to raise children who would becoming discerning adults in the world in which they live.
I was also intrigued with Postman's whole discussion of bureaucracy, especially in reference to our educational systems. Postman says, "If however, we are made to believe that a test can reveal precisely the quantity of intelligence a person has, then for all institutional purposes, a score on a test becomes his or her intelligence. The test transforms an abstract and multifaceted meaning into a technical and exact term that leaves out everything of importance" (89) How interesting if we look at that statement in reference to the grades we give on tests, assignments and report cards. Do our grades signify nothing? Are we guilty of believing that "technology can plainly reveal the true nature of some human condition or belief because the score, statistic, or taxonomy has given it technical form" (90)?
And finally, another point of interest was Postman's review of the medical system and the influence of technology. He could have had a great discussion with Pink, who recognized the power of story as a diagnostic tool in today's world of medicine. Postman would be happy to note that listening to patients and giving their "story" value is once again becoming a well-recognized tool to diagnose medical problems. Possibly this is one area where we are learning to combine the best of both worlds.
So my burning question for all you wise people is this: Has our practice of giving grades and administering standardized tests made us guilty of bowing to the information glut and bureaucracy? Are these tests and grades actually "a tale told by an expert, signifying nothing" (89)?
I have always felt that grades were and are a necessary evil. When I taught second grade, I could just give letters like E, S, and, U, but now if 5th grade I have to give letter grades that correspond with the percentage value that each student has earned on assignments and tests. Of course, other factors enter into the final grades, but I really don't enjoy giving them. To me, they cheapen the richness that learning is. If we never had given grades, a reward for a behavior, would we be able to enjoy the learning process more and appreciate the privilege of learning for the sake of learning?
ReplyDeleteI think as educators and as students we would totally be able to enjoy the learning process more and just learn for the sake of learning. Some students put all their energy into getting the "grade" but if you ask them to reflect on their learning, they can be somewhat clueless. Somehow, this system has to change.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the shift we have taken over the past decade, the only 10 years that I have been in teaching, to more comprehensive assessments. We are able to tell a student much more about what they did well, in addition to constructive things to help them improve in the future with things like rubrics. I like the proactive element of these assessment tools, too, in order to help students know what they are expected to accomplish. We have also made gains in using technology to "tell more of the story" in our assessments.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do feel like we are falling short on the report card, giving a "grade" that is supposed to be quite objective with "stats" to back it up, but is subjective in so many ways as to how we arrived at a certain score/stat for an assigned task. I don't feel like the comment section following each letter grade box, is a sufficient or even good place to critique the student on specifics about the grade the earned beyond somewhat general comments. Do any of you "out there" use a more comprehensive method for your report cards,such as rubrics, portfolios, etc.?
I don't think that we can ever go backwards, and not give grades. However, I do believe we need to understand what the grade is telling us about the student and try to teach the students better based on that. Did this student get a C on his science experiment because he didn't understand the material, didn't understand what was expected of him, he was lazy, etc. Grades are not black and white and we make them black and white. Unless the student is fully engaged with the assignment, the grade will not be telling of the students intellectual capacity of the information.
ReplyDelete