[MD] Quality sacrificed to equality

[David M]

Hi Arlo/Ian

Always seemed odd how examines are graded to me.
If we want to judge competence at maths why do we
not just have hurdles that you can attempt a bit like
music examines, so that people/kids can attempt to
reach whatever level they like/require or can manage.
Then we'd just get people going as far as they can or
want to up the scale of competency. Everyone would
then find their own level rather than there being some
single bar to separate winners and losers. Also allow
people to continue to improve all their life if thehy wanted
to.

David M

> Arlo, I agree already ... :-)
> (Did you see my response to gav on the Quality Conversations thread ?)
> Ian
>
> On 6/11/08, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
>> [Ian]
>> Hi Arlo, not sure where you were coming from with the quoted sentence, 
>> "some
>> things are better than others", But, Yes.
>>
>> [Arlo]
>> The typical rant against "equalization" from a MOQ context relies on this
>> from ZMM, "But some things are better than others, that is, they have 
>> more
>> quality." My point is that many use this (or confuse this) as an attempt 
>> to
>> point to some deeper existential value of the person. Little Johnny's 
>> math
>> score is "better" than Little Joey's. We shouldn't gloss over that to 
>> make
>> Joey "feel good". If he gets a "D", he gets a "D". They should not both 
>> get
>> "A's" to satiate Joey's need to feel good about himself. Fair enough, I 
>> say,
>> but  where from there?
>>
>> What we have gotten in this pendulum swing is a system that does not make 
>> a
>> profound value judgement of Joey, "he's just stupid, a dumb loser kid". 
>> What
>> we want is a system that asks, "why did Joey fail?" And we should have a
>> system that does not dismiss Joey as existentially inferior to Johnny. 
>> And
>> that, Ian, is where we WERE. That is the historical arc from which this
>> pendulum has swung. So when the talk-radio buffoons bloviate about 
>> so-and-so
>> ridiculous example of "equalization", I keep in mind that for every 
>> example
>> of THAT, there are countless Joey's who may find success in alternate
>> learning environments, who are not ridiculed as being "stupid", nor
>> dismissed by a system into a dead-end path. For every "team that is not
>> allowed to keep score", there are now many, many disabled kids who are 
>> given
>> the opportunity to excel in a system that turned a cold, blind eye to 
>> them
>> for so long.
>>
>> In other words, the idea of "betterness" is used by some to attempt to
>> hierarchically rate the worth of a person, rather than the Quality of an
>> ability. And it is with an eye towards this that I remain critical of 
>> those
>> who constantly condemn "equality".
>>
>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>