Robert Dawson wrote:
> "Learning should be a joy...?" It all depends on what you mean by "should".
> If you mean that, given an individual learner it is better that they learn
> joyfully than otherwise, sure. But this does not mean that we can or should
> refuse to teach anybody who is there for some lesser motive than "the Joy of
> Learning".
Since no one else here seems to know anything about Deming, I'll take his
part...
It is up to the teacher to supply the motive for the joy. That is our job, to
teach in need-fulfilling ways. That doesn't mean being "easy" on them at all,
since that would not fill the student's need. Their needs depend on the aim
system. What is the aim of the system? To slack off? Hardly.
>
> Some real work is fun. Some isn't, but is necessary anyhow. (And some is
> a complete waste of time, but that is another story.)
>
> Here, we have an option for students who really are interested in
> learning for its own sake. Most universities do; it's called "auditing" and
> it means that you can sleep in on exam day, not be graded or evaluated, and
> learn just as much as everybody else. Maybe more because you aren't wasting
> time studying the stuff you don't think you need. And do you know how many
> students have taken this option in my courses over the last decade? One.
>
> Evaluation is part of what students pay for. I for one would enjoy
> teaching much more if they didn't want to be evaluated as well, but that
> isn't in the cards. So I spent most of the last week grading exams and
> projects.
>
That is also how I spent my last week! Of course we should do our job of
evaluating student's work and providing timely and useful feedback to them. But
ranking? Is it necessary? Does it optimize the system? Is this really what
the students pay for, to be ranked?
>
> Well, to be exact, some (many?) students really want high grades
> rather than evaluations - at least, so long as prospective employers, etc.,
> are allowed to believe that a standard grading scheme was followed. Assuming
> the story about Deming's grading to be correct, I don't suppose many
> students complained about Deming giving A's out with the rations, as
> somebody upthread mentioned; but they would undoubtedly have complained like
> mad if Deming had also arranged for their transcript to _indicate_ that
> their A's indicated nothing beyond registration in the course, and were a
> philosphical statement rather than an assessment of the studnet's
> performance.
>
I have heard that Deming's students worked very hard in his courses. He even
was said to be working on a book containing their works before he died. There
are other things that one could use besides grades, such as examples of students
work in a course, and personal recommendations.
>
> BTW: What would his recommendation have been to a manufacturer who
> discovered that a supplier was providing a product that was low-grade but
> usable for some purposes, and labelling it as top-grade? Would he have
> advised a manufacturer to engage in such labelling practices?
>
One of Deming's 14 points is that there should be very close ties between
supplier and producer. Ford, after Deming's work with them, introduced a "Q3
quality standard" that all suppliers were required to meet. It is doubtful that
the situation you mention would occur. In any event, since Deming's method is
so data-based, it is certain that such dishonesty would be caught very quickly,
and the supplier would no longer be used.
The analogy for the educational system is that we college educators need to get
more involved in K-12 education, to one degree or another. I said before, no
one said Deming's method is an quick solution. Just assigning P/F grades missed
the bigger picture of what he was trying to accomplish.
>
> If not, it follows (at the best) that he did not consider academic
> grading to have much to do with industrial quality control. Therefore, his
> expertise in the latter field should not give him much credibility on the
> former.
>
> -Robert Dawson
Anyone who knows anything about Deming knows that his message extends well
beyond manufacturing. His 14 points have been reinterpreted for service
institutions of all types, including hospitals, banks, *and* education (several
times over). In fact, Florida Power and Light (a service organization) won the
coveted "Deming Award" for their implementation of his methods.
Also, if you have followed Deming's career, you will know that he spent the last
years of his life working very hard on improving the public educational system.
Of course he considered grading to have a lot to do with quality control
(specifically lack thereof). In his words, "It is ruinous." The problem of
ranking (grading) within teams at service or manufacturing organizations has
been documented to produce problems. (See my previous post about Texas
Instruments).
Peter
