In the article “Grades and Self-Esteem,” Randy Moore argues that schools’ are committing injustice to the idea of learning by focusing more on massaging student’s esteem instead of checking on their academic performance. Moore’s against is insinuated by the schools actions of lowering standards for the purpose of allowing many students pass and get satisfaction. According to Moore, contrary to the teachers’ and schools’ expectation, trading off academic performance for self-esteem compromises the quality of education. First, the building of self-esteem in academic setting leads to grade inflation, mediocre standards; diploma’s devoid of hard work and most importantly, graduation without the sole purpose of school- learning of life skills. While Moore’s argument is poignant and relevant to the idea of learning and the sole reason for schooling, I believe that self-esteem is equally an important element of schooling that should not be ruled out completely. I must admit that I am a believer in Gardener’s theory of multiple- intelligence. For that reason, I make the case that while grades should not be handed out freely to undeserving students, teachers must also reckon that students exhibit different aptitudes that could escape notice if focus is given only to performance in examinations.
Given, grades are like bread and butter to education. Grades function as the organ that check and judge the student’s quality of work and understanding of said concepts. In his argument Moore states that “self esteem is earned and that schools, despite their good intentions, cannot dispense it as a prepackaged handout” (Spack, p.p 119). However, Moore fails to point out that grades and success in classes is a conglomeration of many things. Grading does not mean in all levels to academic performance, grading also includes aspects of class behavior and participation, effort, attendance, punctuality, personality traits as well surrounding environment and obstacles that the student faces while going to school. As such a homeless student from Southside Chicago should not be directly compared to a sub-urban upper middle class kid from the North -side whose parents have enough time to tutor and offer follow up activities.
Perhaps one of the biggest critics to the concept performance measurement using grades is Arthur Lean. In the article “The Farce Called Grading,” Lean refuted the idea of grading students to assess performance. According to him, grading was one of the tools for “rewarding and punishing students” (p. 132). Lean reasoned that grading provides an opportunity for students with less IQ to pay for something which is out of their control. In some cases, the ability for one student to perform better than the other is a completely natural thing even if the surrounding environment is homogenous. Kids that are less intelligent in matters academic must not pay for their inability. Still, despite the overwhelming research on the inability of grades to reflect learning, teacher surround the method by lessening the difficulty of garnering an A to accommodate disadvantaged students. Is this the way to go? Could there be another route to New York?
Moore also argues that giving grades based on self-esteem is injurious to America’s competitiveness with the rest of the world. He cites a study conducted on 13 year olds from the United States and Korea. In the study, Koreans ranked first in Math while Americans ranked last. However, only 23% of Koreans admitted being good at Mathematics as compared to 68% of Americans. His general argument is that handing out grades while respecting self-esteem does not place America at a comfortable place on global competitiveness. Still, while this argument sounds convincing on the need for hard rules on grading, it leaves a lot to be desired. Even though American students became last, they did not compare the average knowledge bases in matters emotional, social, and general life skills. One can almost be certain on this platform; American students would have scored much higher than the Koreans. The American high school experience is designed not to specialize on a given skill or discipline, but to prepare the students for the whole set of life. Perhaps this explains the reason why performance in specific subjects is faltering. Nevertheless, it must be understood that this does not deny possibility of the American student becoming a better and more productive person because of the high “can do” expectation.
The other important segment that Moore fails to recognize is the role of motivation and self-will. For example, I am motivated to attend school because I would like a good life in future. I think Education is the most practical way of realizing life dreams. What motivates me as a student is the desire to accomplish set goals and to meet the societal expectation of completing school. In Marlow’s Hierarchy of need I am in self-esteem because I would like to improve my self esteem, self confidence, achievement and respect of others and from others. Regardless of my threats such as indulgence and desire to make money before completing school, I keep myself motivated by focusing on my goals. In the process of keeping myself in school, I am able to learn how live and work with others. Motivation is a process that initiates, maintains and guides behaviors that are goal-oriented. It is a psychological concept that is directly connected to such important functions as job satisfaction and overall organizational performance. Motivation process involves social, emotional, biological and cognitive forces that activate behavior. It is critical to point out that the employees or the entire human resource fraternity is the life and blood of the existence of the organization.
Human beings are believed to be motivated by the unsatisfied needs. The more the unsatisfied needs one has, the more he is likely to work in a bid to satisfy the needs. Motivation, in the business context, is defined simply as the will to work. Such will is driven by both intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic sources of motivation are associated with the internal relationship between the work and the person performing such work (Elliot & Dweck, 2007, p.114). On the contrary, extrinsic aspects of motivation revolve around such things as remuneration and monetary rewards. Motivation comprises of three components; activation, persistence and intensity. Activation is the initiation of the goal while persistence is the continued to achieve a goal even though obstacles may be present. The major obstacle in this case is financial constraint. Intensity is seen in the focus and stamina that goes into pursuing the goal. In education, motivation is the desire to get the good grades. If grades are for rewards, then students would work harder to attain them. Teachers do not need to inflate grades to compromise on quality. However, teacher must also reckon with the fact that diversity brings challenges that might make the process of passing more difficult for other students. Harmonization thus becomes inevitable.
Literacy is one of the principle goals of education around the world. In today’s era, the ability to read and write is considered almost a basic human right. Education can be credited with the ability to solve some of the problems the world faces today. Evidently, the benefits of education go beyond the obvious advantage of improving life chances. Education empowers people not only with the skills, knowledge and means of succeeding in life, but also with the hope of a better productive and sustainable life. Education is thus an important tool in the realization of a prosperous and developing society. In many societies, education serves as the key solution in common challenges such as hunger, overpopulation, preventable diseases and abusive marriages (Kysilka, 2011, p. 123). Sadly, educational access is still limited to a small section of the society in terms of quality. The debate on whether grades should be improved to cater for those that do well in class is controversial today. Proponents of self-esteem grades such as Arthur Lean cite the damaging aspects of grading students, opponents such as Randy Moore reason that self-esteem grades injure quality. I have argued that using other methods in addition to grades would also be instrumental as an effective way of assessing student’s quality upon graduation.
Work Cited
Elliot, Andrew J., and Carol S. Dweck. Handbook of Competence and Motivation. New York: Guilford, 2005. Print.
http://books.google.be/books?id=B14TMHRtYBcC&printsec=frontcover&hl=nl&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Kysilka, Marcella L. Critical times in Curriculum Thought: People, Politics, and Perspectives. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub., 2011. Print.
http://books.google.com/books?id=BVZi5fLnOwkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Critical+times+in+Curriculum+Thought:+People,+Politics,+and+Perspectives.&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kaxUUpqYPMLOyAGbtIHICg&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA
Lean, Arthur E. And Merely Teach; Irreverent Essays on the Mythology of Education. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1968. Print.
http://books.google.com/books?id=DTEEAQAAIAAJ&q=And+Merely+Teach;+Irreverent+Essays+on+the+Mythology+of+Education&dq=And+Merely+Teach;+Irreverent+Essays+on+the+Mythology+of+Education&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3KxUUobuL4HlyAGDo4DQAw&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA
Spack, Ruth. Guidelines: A Cross-cultural Reading/writing Text. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Print.
http://books.google.com/books?id=BAGVz1u0aYwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=A+Cross-cultural+Reading/writing&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Fa1UUsHOGqOCyAG3rIH4Dw&ved=0CEgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=A%20Cross-cultural%20Reading%2Fwriting&f=false
