The never-ending question of grading art

Richard Braddock in "Research in Written Composition" presents his essay about the do's and don'ts of researching student compositions in the format of an actual report. He starts the essay by saying, "Reading a report, like driving over a bridge, is an act of faith- faith that the other fellow has done his job well" (193). But, after reading the article it seems that the readers of composition reports are approaching a rickety bridge visibly hanging from its last rusted nail.

There are so many variables and subjective areas in composition that it seems nearly impossible to write a report on any aspect of it. Which brings up another issue of grading, and the endless debate of how to grade art. Braddock lists seven assumptions a person should have when evaluating grades from one professor, and in this list he describes the extent of grading subjectivity. He states: "But a student's course grade may have been lowered for failure to do assignments, for cutting class, for poor work in the reading aspect of the course, for failure to take part in enough class discussion, for being personally obnoxious, for being in the class of a severe grader, etc." (208). Of course, no one expects every professor to grade the same way, but the issue is one teacher grading students differently based on the "obnoxiousness" or brown nosing of a student. And then professors wonder why students try to give them what they want instead of using their own creativity and rules in their writing.

Another variable that is as equally important to the attitude of the investigator is the type of student. How does lack of sensitivity to diverse students not only affect their desire to try, but attitude towards the professor. Maybe the obnoxious student is purposely acting out because they don't relate to anything the teacher is saying, and in turn doesn't think the professor cares about their ideas or culture. We addressed this topic briefly in class, and Braddock also mentions it as part of his assignment variable. He states: "Finally, investigators should be mindful of a possible motivational factor in the topic assigned. How many students will write their best when asked to deal with hackeyed topics like 'My Vacation' or 'My Autobiography'?" (198) He goes on to say it's probably not a good idea to have students write about whatever they want, because their is no restrictions to base the grading on and no way to grade the essays against each other. In class we discussed a composition class for only African-Americans. Then you get into issues like: Who is classified as "African-American" Why do they need a class of their own? Are you suggesting they learn differently or that they need special attention? Didn't we outlaw "separate but equal" a long time ago? Should they be graded on a different scale than other students? All in all, most teachers will agree grading art is a tricky line to cross, yet in the end it has to be done.

History of the Western World

THIS IS MY FIRST BLOG FOR ENGLISH 501. DON'T READ THE OTHERS... THEY SUCK.


Each time I learn about the "attic" or Greek orators I am intrigued by Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Their philosophical ideas are techniques that I plan on using when I finally become a teacher.

To start, Socrates' opinion that people are born knowing and that knowledge can be brought out by a series of questions and answers is something I really want to agree with, but don't know how it is plausible. For instance, a person would have to have a certain degree of education in order to even participate in the question and answer situation. If the students do not understand the questions (because of their culture or vocabulary or whatever) they will have no means of extracting the information that is already inside of them. Then the question becomes: how do I ask the right question? What if our worlds do not cross (having the same language is just not enough) If this happens, am I not able to practice Socrates' theory? I hope not.

Plato, however, has a little too much emphasis in philosophy for me to fully follow him. I find the idea of Truth and the "ideal audience" intriguing. And isn't that a critical point in rhetoric? Who are you speaking to? Am I going to be daddy's little girl who wants to stay out a little later, or am I going to try to explain to my mother I am a responsible young adult, capable of a little leeway? I think this is how rhetoric ties into his philosophy. The idea of capital T in truth is a little more confusing. Is the absolute truth out there somewhere, waiting for us to discover it and interpret it correctly, or is it there, but unattainable? If it is unattainable, then does it really even matter if it's there or not? Aristotle's argument that truth is there but with a lowercase, not so absolute. Couldn't that be the same thing as Truth is there but simply unattainable? I think so. After all Aristotle derived his ideas from Plato, even if he does disagree with him.

I hope, through all of this, I will be able to take something from each philosopher and implement it in my teaching skills, allowing my students the room to disagree and derive their own ideas and beliefs from something I said.