Testing and Grades; Is There a Need?

Sara Tillman
May 17, 2007

I appreciate all three authors view and opinions, but have some opinions of my own.
Paul Goodman makes many valid points, but he is being very discriminative in his views. He believes that his idea of no grades will only be successful in a prestigious college like Harvard. Overall, I disagree with his idea about grading. I think that grading is a structured way for teachers to assess their students progress, or lack of it. Grading does lead to some competition, but eliminated grading will not stop competition among classmates. Furthermore, I think a little competition is healthy. Once students graduate from college they will have to have the strength to go out into the real world and compete for jobs, and etc.
I feel that Howard Gardner has a very good point, but then when I look at the letters of response I doubt my thoughts. I am one of those students who take a test to the very last minute, and I think that I could do a lot better on standardized tests if I had a little more time. However, if more time was allowed for certain students there would be no efficient way to test everyone the same. Garver Moore said it the best when he said, "the SAT isn't there to make people feel good".
Out of all of the authors, I agree the most with Diane Ravitch. Even though she is short and semi-harsh with her view she still gets to the point and makes a valid argument. Students need to be tested to see what their capabilities are. For instant, if one must go in for brain surgery, does she want the surgeon who works really hard but may need a little extra time to get the job done, or does she want the surgeon who was the top of her class and gets the job done with time to spare. Reality can be harsh at times, but once an individual realizes their capabilities (perhaps by grades and test scores) they can utilize their strengths and work on their weaknesses.