A philosophical question.

[arigo]

It depends on what grade I was teaching. In the earlier years I'd reward student B to keep him at it to possibly become student A later. I'd give student A a B for a good paper, but not trying. However, If I was teaching something at the college level it's time for reality to hit, and Student A wins hands down.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Student A gets the higher mark, no argument.

On the other hand, I'd assume that this sort of attitude is student A's attitude towards the class in general, and not just the assignment, ditto for student B. In that case, over the course of the semester, student A will be getting marked down for excessive tardiness, piss-poor class participation, and horrid usage study-time. Student B, on the other hand, will probably have bonuses for excellent class participation, attendence and the like, and probably receive a few ups for having discussions with the prof.

In the end, I'd see their grades balancing out by the end of the semester, though Student A will probably still be a little higher by virtue of his knowledge of the subject...which in the end *is* what matters.

[wolveraptor]

Holy shit, college professors can grade use of study time? That's retarded. What do they care how a student spends his time as long as he turns in his work? Student A is better than B. Too bad for B. He'll have to work harder to get the same grades, simply because of the luck of the genetic dice.

I'm not saying I don't sympathize with student B; indeed, I might spend extra time with him to help him catch up, because he obviously wants to. however, A is still academically superior in my book. I'd just tell him that he probably shouldn't pull that shit on his thesis, unless he's a god of some sort.

[Darth Servo]

In that case, over the course of the semester, student A will be getting marked down for...horrid usage study-time.

Since when was "usage of study-time" part of one's grade?

[Keevan_Colton]

In that case, over the course of the semester, student A will be getting marked down for...horrid usage study-time.

Since when was "usage of study-time" part of one's grade?

I think it was about the same time universities started making emotional responses count for the final grade in a course.

[Nova Andromeda]

Holy shit, college professors can grade use of study time?

--Not in any reputable university. At UC Berkeley as well as other universities I've heard about you didn't need to show up to any of the classes, do any of the "home work," etc. The only things that counted were the midterm tests and the final exam. The exception was lab classes for obivious reasons, but even in those classes the tests counted quite heavily along with lab reports and overall lab performance, however, home work didn't count at all.
-One should note that if a student didn't show up to class or study section and didn't do the problem sets they were almost certainly screwed. One doesn't learn much by sitting on their ass. In any event, if someone was just taking a course as a formality that they were already expert in then they could skip everything except the tests and noone would care.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Bleh, never mind that point, then.

I was thinking in a more high-school type setting, but even then, study-time should no longer be something that's graded.

[Max]

Whoever writes the overall better paper, which would probably be student A. This really isn't a philosophical question though, is it?

[KeVinK]

Student B, because s/he completed the exercise.

Then again, I'm a retired teacher who spent a decade or so working with at risk students. (And every one of us in the business hates mvies like "Dangerous Minds" which makes it look like one teacher can overcome a lifetime of neglect and abuse by taking the time to listen to the kids one time.)

The purpose of an education is to develop the self-discipline and habits of thought that will enable you to continue to learn and through continued learning adapt to and master the challenges "real life" throws at you. The end product is relevant only in whether or not it indicates the learner understood the instructions.

Student B fulfilled the purpose of the assignment. Stretch the boundaries of what s/he could do, go beyond what s/he already knew to gain and apply new knowledge. That s/he did not do it perfectly is not the point -- school is a learning environment. The skill will be mastered through repitition, with each trial approximating the desired skill more closely until it is mastered. Student B -- properly encouraged, reinforced and instructed -- will continue to develop and grow. Outside the academic environment, the skill learn will be generalized increasing the chances of her/him "landing on their feet" in whatever circumstance life throws at them.

Student A demonstrated very poor adaptive and/or learning skills. As long as s/he already knows a topic, s/he will be fine. But the minute a challenge comes along -- something that involves self-discipline and work to master -- this person will fail. The literate and intellingent barista discussing Proust while dispensing coffee at 30 and dreaming of what life could have been like if only the world were wise enough to recognize her/his true worth. The bitter telemarketer able to deliniate the social and political structure of Rome over its entire history but not successfully amintain a marriage. Salespersons at a dozen retail outlets -- or worse travelling -- with no goal or purpose to life beyond a certainty they had been destined for better things. All of these people were Student A types. No doubt their SAT scores were in the upper ten percent.

The problem with focusing on the product rather than the process is it handicaps the learner. Programs like "No Child Left Behind" which require instructors to train learners to repeat rote answers whether or not they comprehend what they are regurgitating have more to do with training parrots than educating individuals. Mastery-based education, not outcome-based grading is the key to developing the intellignece -- even the wisdom -- to make knowledge worthwhile.

[The Grim Squeaker]

Student A primarily because I was Student A on many occasions.

Seconded, this happens to me alot in english class, where I breeze and get full marks on an essay I cobbled together during the break, while others who work hard get marked hard.

Study? English? Those words are unfamiliar to me, maybe you mean doing other peoples projects in 5 minutes then coming into a test and taking a 100 when I bothered to come to class (I usually got a free pass to the library instead).
I'd give it to A, frankly it's a situation I can understand since while I always prep for tests the amount I need to prep for Bible/History/civil studies is tiny and I have'nt got anything less than a hundred in history since 10th grade (Well the Bagrut/final was 97, but I blame the teachers mere 95 shield test ).
Frankly, you can't blame anyone for being smart and an idiot can get good grades (Especially in math) if tey work their asses off (enough practice can let you pass almost anything if you are'nt an idiot )

[KeVinK]

Speaking of mastering the process: How does one edit a post here? I spotted some errors after submitting that last post.

[Ace Pace]

Speaking of mastering the process: How does one edit a post here? I spotted some errors after submitting that last post.

Thanks to some earlier trolls using the edit function badly, editing posts is disabled in SLAM and several other forums.

[Guardsman Bass]

Student B fulfilled the purpose of the assignment. Stretch the boundaries of what s/he could do, go beyond what s/he already knew to gain and apply new knowledge. That s/he did not do it perfectly is not the point -- school is a learning environment. The skill will be mastered through repitition, with each trial approximating the desired skill more closely until it is mastered. Student B -- properly encouraged, reinforced and instructed -- will continue to develop and grow. Outside the academic environment, the skill learn will be generalized increasing the chances of her/him "landing on their feet" in whatever circumstance life throws at them.

This is definitely true. Still, hasn't Student A done just as much work, if not more? Unlike student B, he's accumulated a treasure trove of knowledge about the topic over a period of time, voluntarily.

Furthermore, the scenario in the OP is isn't specific about the Students' general performances. Student A obviously was quite lazy about this assignment, but is that because he is lazy in general about self-discipline in doing homework, or just lazy on this particular assignment since he can afford to be?

The way I see it, if he can cite some of those sources he has lingering around in his head in a bibliography, along with writing a superb essay, he's got the grade.

[wolveraptor]

The purpose of an education is to develop the self-discipline and habits of thought that will enable you to continue to learn and through continued learning adapt to and master the challenges "real life" throws at you. The end product is relevant only in whether or not it indicates the learner understood the instructions.

What makes you think Student A didn't? Obviously, he/she is able to absorb and adapt to information with ease and speed. That means that for this person, real life will be a breeze.

Student A demonstrated very poor adaptive and/or learning skills. As long as s/he already knows a topic, s/he will be fine. But the minute a challenge comes along -- something that involves self-discipline and work to master -- this person will fail. The literate and intellingent barista discussing Proust while dispensing coffee at 30 and dreaming of what life could have been like if only the world were wise enough to recognize her/his true worth. The bitter telemarketer able to deliniate the social and political structure of Rome over its entire history but not successfully amintain a marriage. Salespersons at a dozen retail outlets -- or worse travelling -- with no goal or purpose to life beyond a certainty they had been destined for better things. All of these people were Student A types. No doubt their SAT scores were in the upper ten percent.

Irrelevant. It is not your job to grade the student's character. It is your job to grade their paper. Granted, this is advice you might give to Student A. Furthermore, it is unlikely that this person made it to college without learning topics they didn't know. Student A clearly knows when he/she doesn't know a topic, and assimilates the information quickly.

The problem with focusing on the product rather than the process is it handicaps the learner. Programs like "No Child Left Behind" which require instructors to train learners to repeat rote answers whether or not they comprehend what they are regurgitating have more to do with training parrots than educating individuals. Mastery-based education, not outcome-based grading is the key to developing the intellignece -- even the wisdom -- to make knowledge worthwhile.

A good college professors gives assignments which require deeper understanding, not simple regurgitation. It is in highschool and the lower grades when this mockery of eduction is found. Not in college.

[Keevan_Colton]

So KeVink you're of the meaningless marks school of marking?

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Student B, because s/he completed the exercise.

So we should reward Student B just for finishing, even though his work was marginal, at best? Furthermore, you seem to be making a number of assumptions that aren't based on anything found in the opening post. See below:

You are a teacher, and have assigned an essay to your students. The question goes like this: One of your students (student A) is incredibly bright, he knows everything about the subject like the back of his hand, can recite stuff about it from almost any source, etc. etc. etc. The day the essay is due, you see him 45 minutes before class starting his essay. When he hands it in it's obvious he has done no special work or research for it and was, in fact, quite lazy about the whole thing, but because of what he already knows it has everything that you expected from the assignment, and more. A second student (student B,) however, is slow. He means well, he does the work, but he just doesn't quite get it. He gives you a barely par essay rife with minor problems, but it's obvious he spent a considerable amount of time researching it and put extra-effort into it, probably more than anyone else in the class.

(Emphasis mine - The Editor.)

I completely fail to see how Student A who has, by the OP, gone above and beyond the requirements for the assignment failed to "complete" the exercise and should be rewarded less than Student B who tries his best to produce "barely par" work. Encourage Student B to try harder, yes, but not by awarding high marks for marginal competence.

Student A demonstrated very poor adaptive and/or learning skills.
(snip)

Yet, Student A clearly went above and beyond the expectations of the assignment as set out in the scenario. A better scenario might've involved the class being given an assignment where neither Student A or Student B knew anything about the topic. If Student A outperformed Student B in that case, then we could assign Student A the higher marks without all this worming and weasling about to give Student B the bettter score. If Student A did worse than Student B in that case, then we could legitimately give Student B's work a better score than Student A's.

However, we have to work with the information given in the scenario. Student A might have a promising career as a Jeopardy champion (knowing otherwise useless trivia by rote memorization,) but then again, Student A might have known the subject back and forth through genuine interest and research before the start of the scenario, and the instructor just happened to assign an essay that was right up his alley. You're making assumptions that are, for the purposes of this particular exercise, meaningless.

The problem with focusing on the product rather than the process is it handicaps the learner. Programs like "No Child Left Behind" which require instructors to train learners to repeat rote answers whether or not they comprehend what they are regurgitating have more to do with training parrots than educating individuals. Mastery-based education, not outcome-based grading is the key to developing the intellignece -- even the wisdom -- to make knowledge worthwhile.

But you can't ignore product either. One shouldn't reward a student for fucking up, even if he fucked up while making a sincere effort.

Oh, and on certain areas of the board, editing of one's posts has been disabled, since certain folks in the past have used the function in a dishonest fashion.

[Darth Yoshi]

Student A, because like everyone said, he wrote the better essay. However, I will reprimand him for holding off until the last minute to do the assignment. For Student B, I'll take him aside after class and commend him on his effort, and offer to tutor him during his spare time.

[Darth Servo]

Student A, because like everyone said, he wrote the better essay. However, I will reprimand him for holding off until the last minute to do the assignment.

IIRC, there was not time requirement for the assignment. Reprimands based on personal opinions like "he didn't seem to put enough time in on the assignment" will often get a teacher in trouble.

[Braedley]

Student A, because like everyone said, he wrote the better essay. However, I will reprimand him for holding off until the last minute to do the assignment.

IIRC, there was not time requirement for the assignment. Reprimands based on personal opinions like "he didn't seem to put enough time in on the assignment" will often get a teacher in trouble.

A reprimand may simply be pulling Student A aside after class and asking why the lack luster attitude towards the assignment.

[dworkin]

This is a no-brainer.

Student A "it has everything that you expected from the assignment", thus you give him the higher grade.

Student B "He gives you a barely par essay rife with minor problems",
this is what a C- was invented for. You also hope they take the criticism on how to improve to heart.

It boils down to meeting the measures you devised when the assignment was handed out. Those measures should be availiable to the students as well.

On a side note most assignments I give out test my students ability to present what they think and the ability to present those thoughts coherently.

Eg "Explain why endangered species should be protected."

Most of my students this year liked this one. They had previously taken it as an article of faith that endangered species must be protected. Two even disagreed!

If I want to test what facts they know then it is done in class time.

Eg. "What measures are taken to protect endangered species? Use one particular species, eg kiwi, black robin, kakapo as an example."

[dworkin]

Why repremand the student at all? Your subject is just one of many they do in addition to all the other time demands a HS student has (part time job, girlfriend, sports and family). Just because your's is a breeze for them doesn't mean their other subjects are.

[KeVinK]

If the purpose of education were to produce as many thousand-word essays on the average airspeed of an unladen swallow (or perhaps a less relevant topic) then of course whichever student best able to produce verbiage would have met the criteria.

If the purpose of education is to help individuals develop cognitive skills, personal discipline, the habit of thoughtful action rather than unthinking reaction, the willingness to take chances and the self-awareness to assess those chances, then the student who strove the hardest met the criteria.

If you are going to reward students for innate ability which they have done nothing to earn, then you might as well reward them based on their height, or where they were born, or the color of their skin. (Oh, wait! .... Never mind. Different topic.)

Over the course of my career as a teacher, I have taught in a suburban elementary school (every grade, K-5), an urban alternative high school for, a white-flight prep school, a program for victims of abuse and neglect, a special education setting for children and teens with severe emotional handicaps, and in a community college. At no time in any setting did I ever witness a learner who was in any way helped by a grade – except when it was awarded as an encouragement. And quite frankly, I avoided dong that as much as possible, preferring a tangible reward system – whether it be a piece of penny candy or greater opportunity/responsibility (and higher expectations).

Grades are useful in sorting eggs. They have no utility for the learner. The purpose of grades in schools is to document that the instructor was at least aware of the learner at some time. This evidence of awareness is used in budget requests, etc. A range of grades is preferred – a teacher who does not fail whatever the accepted percentage is for his or her institution is regarded as "too lenient."

A portfolio assessment is a useful indicator of a learner's progress in mastering desired skill sets. However, it's a hell of a lot of work for the teacher. Which is why there are grades. Ease in egg sorting.

Of course, this is based solely on my career and experience as an educator. Your mileage may – and in fact should – vary.

[Keevan_Colton]

Right, you are a fucking moron.

Grades are meaningless if they are not based on objective criteria...a given grade should coresspond to a given quality of work. Lemme guess, did you use a curve when you marked? (a similarly fucking retarded notion, if you're in a class of equal ability your mark will be lower than if you're in a class full of retards...)

Marking criteria should be objective and available to the students. I've had this out with several profs here who seem to think they can make an exam based on "emotional responses" to pictures...there can be no objective measure of emotional response that means grades based on it are meaningless, they cannot be compared in any way.

To put it another way, if the assignment is one that the student can pull out of their ass to an A quality fortyfive minutes before the deadline, the problem isnt the students lack of work it's a piss poor assignment.

You are demonstrating the massive problem with the education system in that grades are meaningless...that's a flaw in your entire fucking system due to a dislike of failing people. Over in the UK we are still trying to make sure grades have meaning because they are something employers can look at and know "That person is good at maths" or "That person cant do maths, lets not hire them to do the stock check then."

Grades are meaningless in your method, not in one where a given standard of work gets a given grade. Then knowing what grade a person has achieved lets you know the standard of work they are capable of producing in a given area.

[Braedley]

Grades are meaningless if they are not based on objective criteria...a given grade should coresspond to a given quality of work. Lemme guess, did you use a curve when you marked? (a similarly fucking retarded notion, if you're in a class of equal ability your mark will be lower than if you're in a class full of retards...)

What makes you think that all marking on a curve is bad? As an example, I wrote an abysmal exam on tuesday. I'm pretty sure that marked as is, I failed it. So did half the rest of the class. Now I didn't know all the material that I was expected to know, but a friend of mine says he studied for something like 15 hours just for that exam, and he thinks he didn't do well on it. He also said that studying an extra 10 hours still wouldn't have made him feel like he could have aced that exam. The class is not full of retards. Some of the smartest people I personally know are in that class (although granted, there is one retard in the class, but we won't talk about that asshole). If it's obvious to the class that the marks weren't scaled, then there will be many angry students knocking at the dean's door in January asking for an appeal, simply because the test was not fair.

I agree that setting every test and assignment (hell, basically any practical assignment) to a curve isn't right, but don't go overgeneralizing.

[Keevan_Colton]

The entire notion of a curve is stupid. It means you cannot directly compare results between one class and another then since the curve will be different.

Edit:

Or to put it another way, you didnt know all the material that was expected for the exam. There are three main options:

Flunk you/give you a low grade for not knowing the stuff.
Use a curve and pass people who dont know what the course is meant to test or give them a better grade.
Adjust what the course is meant to test to a more reasonable level.

One of these makes the tests for the given course pointless...