Editorial Note:
Wow, I'm an idiot! At first I wrote "I searched all my previous posts and comments because I think someone sent me this link to an article about computers grading essays. I couldn't find the comment, if there is one, so if you sent this to me, thanks. If I found it on my own, well, I'll do my best not to break my arm patting myself on the back." I guess I should have been a better reader and actually looked at the author's name! It's my own group-mate, Laine Harling-Obando. Maybe not having the hyphenated last name threw me off...okay I'm just making excuses now. Thanks Laine! Great article!
Did you ever see The Shawshank Redemption? It's a movie about prison, but more generally it's a movie about what keeps each of us in our own personal prison. At one point about two-thirds of the way through the movie, one of the characters, Brooks, gets released from prison after a fifty year sentence. He is shocked to see so much change around him -- motorized cars buzzing past him, people in suits fast-walking to presumably important jobs -- and remarks in a letter back to his prison-buddies that "The world went and got itself in a damn hurry."
My obsession with the movie to the point that I can call up random lines aside, I worry that what is being described in the article is exactly what Brooks was talking about: everyone getting themselves in a damn hurry.
We can do in a matter of seconds now what once took months. Think about that for a moment. Really. In previous generations, if one wanted to communicate in written form with someone else thousands of miles away, she would have to: write a letter, fold it up, place it in an envelope, buy postage, attach the postage, walk to a post office, place the letter in a slot, then wait several weeks for a response. Now, all she would have to do is sign on to an ISP, type an email, click to send, and wait a few hours (or minutes) for a response. This system is far better, more convenient, and more efficient.
But it seems to me that the overriding principle at work here, the "I can have it now and if I can't I want someone to figure out a way I can" mentality, has become detrimentally pervasive. I don't particularly think we're at some pinnacle of human history: These are not the "end-times"; we don't face more or less moral or ethical dilemmas than at any other point in our past. However, what is different is that we can have more things faster and more conveniently and I think we are becoming spoiled.
Want a master's degree? Send away for one. Want that dress you see on the television? Order it online. Want to see a sporting event? Pay-per-view it or watch minute-by-minute updates scroll across your cellphone or laptop.
I'm not decrying these things, by and large. I am in a distance program for my master's, and I love that I can get a quality education from a reputable institution with progressive educators. I am typing in a blog which millions of people could read instantly if they deemed it worthy. I would be a hypocrite if I railed against the increasing expeditiousness of processes while using the expedited processes, and I'm not into hypocrisy.
But when I see things like computers grading essays, I can't help but wonder, are we in too much of a damn hurry?
Several postings ago I mentioned an article about Les Perelman, the man who found a "formula" for scoring high on the SAT essay portion. If he can find a formula in a system which uses humans to evaluate writing, how soon will it be before someone figures out a formula for the system that uses a computer to evaluate writing? And as soon as someone does, teachers will begin teaching it, or the conscientious teachers who don't will have students who figure out they need to know the "formula" in order to do well.
We don't seem to be very selective as humans. We tend to overgeneralize (see, I'm doing so right now!). If we can have one thing now, we have a misguided belief that we should be able to have anything now. This was the impetus for implementing a technology that evaluates writing.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't ever imagine wanting a series of 1's and 0's telling me how well I write.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hi Richard...
I don't want to take away that back patting you might be enjoying, but I sent you that link. In fact, I wrote that article in college. I had just finished taking the CLEP test for English Composition and I cannot tell you how difficult it was for me to stay neutral as a reporter. In fact, I think if you really read the article carefully, my own bias does come through toward the middle. I grilled that OSU professor to the point that she scowled at me any time she saw me from then on! OSU and OU have a huge rivalry, yet that was the first time I really agreed with the OU perspective.
You know how kids have always been notorious for their "I want it now, now, now" rants? Kids in the past often had no choice but to wait. Today's kids are a different breed. It spills over into the classroom, as we see kids running to the computer to get resources for reports, ignoring the books and encyclopedias gathering dust around them unless the teacher makes it a requirement.
You reference to The Shawshank Redemption is wonderful. Like I've said before, you always manage to tie things in with popular culture.
As for the 1's and 0's, I now take this opportunity as a student, not a journalist, to say "No, thank you!"
Laine, I am so indescribably embarrassed and sorry. I always file away good things I get because I rarely have time to read them as soon as I get them. I had this favorite-placed and decided to read it today. I edited my post to reflect my Laine-assisted epiphany.
I did notice a bias, but I didn't and don't care because I agree with you whole-heartedly.
Thanks for teaching me to read the author's name! I am an utter dunderhead.
No worries at all, Richard. I understand that your post was written about the idea of computers grading essays, not so much the content of the article. I also do the "filing away" thing. You're off the hook!
Post a Comment