grading

One of the ways in which most grading systems are fucked up is that there's more downside than upside.

This teacher started grading me lower, writing "You can do better than this" on my papers.

She worked at the school district as a secretary and had access to the grading software.

We, the designers of the ML approach, initially don't know how to build essay grading systems.

The brutal career age-grading comes from a need to exclude those who refute the lie of promised progress.

I guess it's a matter of what sort of things you grade on, For my personal OS grading metric there is only one item, "Helps me Get Shit Done".

I can still manage A's and B's in classes without ever understanding the content only because of the way the grading system's designed.

Is it not your job to make sure the playing field is level, especially at a school where there is such a high pressure to do well as a result of a strict grading curve policy?

Another piece of the puzzle is grading-as-certification rather than grading-as-progress report or some other scheme.

The whole point of the grading system was to acknowledge subtlety; that it's okay if you don't have an A, because it doesn't mean you haven't learnt anything, it just means you haven't learnt everything [in that course].

In middle and high school, getting 17 or 18 is already stupendous; in college, top students rarely ever go above 15, and some professors skew their grading to rarely give out marks above 10 in order to toughen up students.

The problem was that grading had become such a low priority for a professor that the take-home final answers, that only a gradable subset of possible answers were really accepted for any question, so that grading could be done more on the number of citations than how effectively you communicated an answer.