Mike Palij wrote: > I knew a few people in the exp psych program [that used the "attrition > approach"] > and was amazed at what I could only call the "intellectual brutality" they > experienced. > I agree with you Mike, and I don't much like it either. I also don't like what we have now, however, in which we make bad predictions about who is going to do well, and then, once we have made our bad decisions, we are pressured to do anything and everything (including dropping intellectual standards and, even then, passing people who still don't really deserve it) to ensure that our charges eventually graduate. The radical alternative I outlined (but don't really advocate) eliminates our bad initial decisions (which, because we are unable to increase our "sensitivity," can only be fixed by cranking the "bias" way up (to use some SDT lingo), which is essentially what the Ivies do), and brings back the real possibility of failure (for those who aren't motivated simply by the prospect of learning). And at the very least, it keeps those who are there for the wrong reasons from bringing down the level of the whole system through sheer weight of numbers at the expense of everyone else.
In an era where the "gentleman's C" has morphed into the "everyone's B," is there way to effectively address these real problems without being so "intellectually brutal"? I tried out "no grades" the other day, and someone battered me with the (specious) prospect of surgeons who didn't know which organs were which. Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ "Part of respecting another person is taking the time to criticise his or her views." - Melissa Lane, in a /Guardian/ obituary for philosopher Peter Lipton ================================= --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
