Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (51228)	6/17/2002 2:18:46 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

On the other hand I think their should be greater penalties for clearly unreasonable law suits, to discourage the merely whiney. Which was the point of the clip. These folks are not even being identified publicly. I would think that would be a deterrent. I suppose, for a lot of people, they'd love an opportunity to explain themselves on the Today show no matter how ridiculous their POV, but for many it would be a deterrent and the rest of us would get educated.

To: epicure who wrote (51228)	6/17/2002 2:29:45 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Interesting discussion, X and JC. When I first read the article, I was incined to agree with JC. But you make some good points, X. But I wonder whether it isn't different in different classes and at different levels. For some subjects -- math, for example -- it's pretty easy to see what grade a student deservers, though becoming less so with the fetish for making kids explain their answers in writing -- that penalizes math skills and elevates literacy skills. If you view math as a language, it should be accepted on its own terms, not with the requirement that you be able to explain it an another language. But when you get to English, or interpretive history, classes, say, it becomes harder. For example, do we really think a lay jury is qualified, no matter how good the experts who present the case are, to make a binding decision on whether Persuasion or Emma is a better novel? That's what it amounts to to say that this paper is an A paper and that one is a B paper IMO, one of the funamental goals of law is that a case should on one set of facts and law, be decided the same by any jury. We know that doesn't happen, but I think it's a goal of law -- that if the same facts and law are pesented to several juries, the verdicts will be the same But I don't see how that can happen with the grading process, especially as you move up in the educational process and creativity becomes, at least in theory, more sophisticated. And the next step. of course, will be some PhD candidate suing his thesis examination team because he didn't pass the oral examination and didn't get his degree. So are we really going to ask a jury to decide whether this thesis titled "Baudelaire's translations of Poe -- poetry or pornography?" merits the award of a PhD? Good arguments on both sides. I won't say you changed my mind, X, but you certainly shook my confidence in agreement with JC.

To: epicure who wrote (51228)	6/17/2002 4:10:13 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

It's about time we disagreed on something. I miss the old days<g>. Sadly, though, I have to say we really don't disagree that much, as we are ranging over different levels, and some apples and oranges. The subjectivity of grading probably increases linearly as you go up the line. In high school, for example, you are likely to find hard graders and easy graders, even among those teaching the same subject at the same level in the same school. At the college level, I always remember the student who said, "I did exactly what you asked for ... and you gave me a "C". So I had to explain that a C was appropriate for that, and to get an A or B you have to perform at a level of high honors and distinction. He then said, how do I do that? And I said, that's not for me to show you ... it works the other way around. Of course, at that point I was sick and tired of the whiny little s**t, anyway.