Posted on 07/29/2020 4:57:55 AM PDT by karpov
I just finished a fascinating book, The Recovery of the West, by polymath Englishman Michael Roberts. Roberts became famous as a poet, but was trained as a scientist and spent much of his life as a teacher.
Brief history of grading
The book was published in 1941. A teacher in a typical English school at that time would be very familiar with individual differences in ability because grading practices were unforgiving. After every exam, pupils’ “marks” would typically be posted outside the classroom so that everyone could see just how good he or she was in relation to everybody else. The results of national high-stakes A-Level (college-entrance) examinations were posted publicly outside the University of London Senate house. No effort was made to hide the performance of individual students from public view. Indeed, making individual results public was regarded as a useful incentive to effort.
Grades were treated in much the same way in U.S. colleges in the 1960s: Results after each exam were posted with students’ names. But this practice began to run into difficulties because it made students, or at least those lower down in the grade list, unhappy.
The first step to meet this objection was to anonymize the grades by using students’ Social Security numbers. A student could still see how she was doing in relation to others, but not vice versa.
But of course, that was not satisfactory, partly because Social Security numbers, even without the name of the student, could pose a “security risk.” I’m not sure just what kind of risk, but the prospect of any risk at all, combined with the by-now almost universal aversion to ranking, was enough to stop any kind of public posting at all.
(Excerpt) Read more at jamesgmartin.center ...
Genetics and development during maturation of the human brain and body disperses those gifts of ability throughout the population.
99.9%?
Even taking attendance will tend to favor certain demographics over others.
How they are endowed and how they use that endowment are two different things. That is why we need grades. It is interesting that someone involved in education does not recognize this.
Exactly. Because the "elites" are snobs. (Differentiating here between the so-called elites and the successful people who stay down-to-earth.)
Snobs look down their noses at certain jobs, for example. They cannot accept that most people are content living and working where they do. That worker earning an hourly wage might have a lot of money squirrelled away, and maybe his house is paid off. He's probably satisfied with the choices he's made. But many Democrats are such snobs that they cannot accept that. Many protesters claim to have college degrees, or they're college students. Notice how they heckle the police officers. They call the police "dumb." Among those arrested for committing violence were lawyers and a software engineer. All of these snobbish people felt entitled to riot in the neighborhoods they look down upon.
>>>"Most poor people understand why they’re poor. They realize that they may not be as capable or talented as those that are better off, or if they do have the abilities but fate has them starting at a lower rung on the ladder, know that if they strive they can improve their lot."<<<
It's mostly about hard work and choices. Opportunities abound for everyone in this country. Good old fashioned common sense pays off.
About 30 years ago, a Mexican family would come in and clean the offices where I worked. They'd vacuum, clean the toilets, and so on. Got to talking with them and found out they owned a big house in the wealthiest section of town. Later, I worked with a Mensa member who had a lot of personal problems.
“Exactly. Because the “elites” are snobs.”
This breed of elitists are far worse than snobs. They are the bleeding heart activists who are racked by guilt pangs at the sight of someone doing better than another. And they will do anything to enrage the “poor” to destroy anybody that’s doing a bit better. They are envy mongers.
They are the vilest people in existence.
The root of those guilty feelings is snobbery. Liberal “elites” call everyone else “hateful” or “racist,” but they are the ones who look down upon other people.
One of the fatal flaws of our own constitution is this assertion that all men are created equal.
All human beings may be equal in God’s sight as far as how he values them.
In reality and the true meaning of the phrase men are not created equal women are not created equal even identical twins are not created equal they may be very similar but the assertion is a false assertion in it flaws our own constitution as human beings and as Americans.
When the a priori assumptions are wrong all the resulting conclusions and theories are also flawed.
We are all uniquely valued by God. According to scripture God values each person as worthy of salvation through his son. All can be saints all can be saved all have a divine spark of unlimited potential in certain areas of their life.
All can be saints all can be saved all have a divine spark of unlimited potential in certain areas of their life.
But they are in no way equal they are not equivalent they are not similar and strengths or weaknesses they are individuals who are different.
The statement all are equal in his site is not true either. Apostle Paul was called to write substantial portions of the New Testament. David was called to write a substantial portion of the psalms.
Solomon was worthy in God’s sight to write the book of proverbs for the most part and the song of Solomon.
I was deemed not qualified in place or in time or in character to write any of those books or chapters.
I would say that all humans have an infinitely valuable Capacity in God’s sight for the things he plans in their future.
But Ruth Bader Ginsburg is nowhere morally or intellectually equal To Clarence Thomas.
So the often alluded to statement that all are equal is in fact a misrepresentation of truth and fact which is not the basis for law or civil government. Some people need to be institutionalized in a prison because they are not equal to people who should be in public life running businesses and raising families. Absolutely not equal!
The homosexual and LGBT whatever lifestyle is not equivalent or equal to the proven nuclear family with 1 husband 1 wife for life with children and grand children to follow after their pattern.
If one were writing a new constitution one of its a priori assumptions would be that none of us are equal, but all are equally valuable to mankind as a whole and to God as human beings.
But God did not qualify me to write a constitution. I observe a fact we are not equal. No way. No how. And at no time.
A snob is somebody who looks down on people and has zero guilt - he rather enjoy his status and has no sense of pity or guilt toward the “poor”. He is not racked by a sense of guilt and injustice the way elitist social justice warriors are.
He’s not on a mission to remake society into an egalitarian utopia.
There are different types of snobs. The liberal “elite” are the condescending type, which is why they deride black conservatives and Trump supporters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.