Does grading violate the freedom of speech?

Is this newsgroup "distorted" by instructorial power?

There are, of course, other forms of power besides money, and they too can
distort free communication. For example, many of the arguments in
previous threads suggest that my grading power distorts communication in
this newsgroup. Is there any way around this?

On a related note: Many of the arguments in the previous threads have
gotten me to think about the evaluation system for this newsgroup, but
none has yet convinced me that my original set-up was fundamentally
flawed. I am willing to modify the system even if I am not so convinced,
but only if y'all reach some sort of rough consensus about what changes
should be made. But though I hear dissatisfaction, I hear no substantive
consensus.

All three basic free speech positions require sweat. "Absolutists" have
to sweat when they face up to the fact that they have to allow even very
damaging, hurtful speech. "Establishmentarians" have to sweat when they
confront the fact that they must prohibit some deeply meaningful, valuable
speech.

"Moderates" have to sweat when they try to draw lines which balance the
competing considerations of harm and value. If you want to change the
conditions of this newsgroup, that is the sweat you now need to undertake.

Jean Goodwin.

In response to:
>
> All three basic free speech positions require sweat. "Absolutists" have
> to sweat when they face up to the fact that they have to allow even very
> damaging, hurtful speech. "Establishmentarians" have to sweat when they
> confront the fact that they must prohibit some deeply meaningful, valuable
> speech.
>
> "Moderates" have to sweat when they try to draw lines which balance the
> competing considerations of harm and value. If you want to change the
> conditions of this newsgroup, that is the sweat you now need to undertake.
>
> Jean Goodwin.

I am ready to sweat. As a moderate, I agree that some form of grading is
only acceptable in an educational environment. Students may need to be
pushed a little to find the time to participate, but that is not to say
that they should be required to participate according to someone elses
guidelines. Students must accept that they are enrolled in a college
course and therefore have volunteered themself to the process of
evaluation. With this in mind, they can debate about the method of such
evaluation. After all, it should be everyone's aim to encourage open
deliberation. If the students have expressed that the current form
creates a "chilling effect" and is also unfair in their minds because they
believe their speech to be more worthwhile than an arbitrary grade, then
something should be done. How can you accomodate everybody? Well, (and
here's the sweat) you can't.
We need to accept a) that participation in this situation is a
requirement because we are in a college class and b) there will be some
form of evaluation that serves more to reward those who do participate
than to punish those who don't. According to this philosophy, you may say
the more someone writes the better their grade, but that is not the aim.
To avoid such measurements it needs to be established that
particpiation is a) relevant to the course and includes information
discussed in class or in the reading and b) is succinct in its efforts to
convey a point (possibly having a maximum of two pages per post).
As far as the content, it will be assumed according to a teacher /
student committment towards the pursuit of knowledge that the student is
writing out of genuine thoughfulness - no one will judge the
persuasiveness of an argument or the personality of the author because it
will be assumed that we are all together in an endeavor to explore and
debate issues and not concerned with a) who "wins" - whose points are more
convincing and b) who is more unique / outrageous / obnoxious. It will be
assumed that all posts are equally worthwhile based on the First Amendment
which says that all voices are equal.
This information leads me to the conclusion that there is only one way
to encourage deliberation while keeping the fairness of the grading
system. If the internet participation was dealt with in a Pass/Fail
manner people would feel confident that their particpation was not being
judged by subjective standards. People who wanted to participate more
often would not be doing so because they were trying to raise their grade,
because it would get them nowhere since there would be no grade
differntiation between those who did particpate. People who chose only to
participate once a week would not feel concerned about saying what they
thought the graders wanted them to say, they could use the time to
honestly convey their thoughts - even if that was that they weren't
concerned with the issue, as long as they defended why with information
from the class - showing that they had indeed attended. People who say
this is unfair because they participated more often and would like a
better grade than the lazy members are really too self-centered and
focused on themselves more than the process of deliberation anyway, so
they should learn to treat everybody's voice as equal to theirs and not
assume theirs is worth more ( a better grade) just because it is louder.
Anyway, I'm about to break my own rule by talking for too long. I
don't consider my stopping to be a chilling effect. I consider it to be a
practical use of the medium. Just like candidates are given time limits
during debates to encourage the fairness of deliberation, we should be
aware that in real life you cannot talk forever and not stop and listen
once in a while. A course that encourages both, even requires both does
not violate our First Amendment rights as long as it refrains from judging
the quality of our speech.
Larna MacHutchin

In article ,
jeangoodwin@nwu.edu (Jean Goodwin) wrote:

> There are, of course, other forms of power besides money, and they too can
> distort free communication. For example, many of the arguments in
> previous threads suggest that my grading power distorts communication in
> this newsgroup. Is there any way around this?

In article ,
lfm531@lulu.acns.nwu.edu (Larna MacHutchin) wrote:

> This information leads me to the conclusion that there is only one way
> to encourage deliberation while keeping the fairness of the grading
> system. If the internet participation was dealt with in a Pass/Fail
> manner people would feel confident that their particpation was not being
> judged by subjective standards. People who wanted to participate more
> often would not be doing so because they were trying to raise their grade,
> because it would get them nowhere since there would be no grade
> differntiation between those who did particpate. People who chose only to
> participate once a week would not feel concerned about saying what they
> thought the graders wanted them to say, they could use the time to
> honestly convey their thoughts - even if that was that they weren't
> concerned with the issue, as long as they defended why with information
> from the class - showing that they had indeed attended.

I agree with Larna's suggestion of making the newsgroup discussion a p/n
part of the final evaluation. Personally, I know that my grade will
suffer because of my limited participation on the newsgroup. But, I am a
person of few words (just ask anyone who knows me). I have always been
the person who prefers to listen to those who choose to speak, and will
throw my two-cents in if I have something meaningful to say. As far as
this newsgroup goes, I try to get on as often as I possibly can but I
don't always respond to others postings because I either have nothing to
contribute on their subject, or else someone has already posted what I
would have said. For this, I am penalized. I must admit that I could be
coming up with my own subjects to be discussed, but that is one my
personality "flaws": I've always been one to follow, rather than to lead.
So, I guess my suggstion for the newsgroup evaluation would be to either
lower its value in the final grading, or else maybe let each of the
students decide how much it will be worth, with 0% not being an option
(This has been done in other classes). I don't know. Just thought I'd
share.

Leslie Cardozo

Back to
case page.