read and reflect on philly103's whole insightful post, rather than to rely on a "Cliffs Notes" version.
LOL, this was not intended to be a "Cliffs Notes" version of philly103's post, but rather was clearly labeled as ideas which I hope mecreature had in mind when planning to share "some of" philly103's thoughts.
Thank you for taking the time to share it with us, philly103, without worrying about whether it precisely fit within the bounds of the thread title.
Rather than
not fitting precisely within the thread title,
philly103's post veered off-topic, leaving behind college grade inflation or even the broader topic of grading practices. Much of the post content was
far outside the topic including philly03 arguing against
strawman statements, such as practices which had not been suggested (
"It's stupid to expect a 5th grade math class to teach 7th grade math just because a minority percentage of the students can handle it.") and viewpoints mis-attributed (
"Your concern about equal outcomes seems predicated on the idea that teachers should not want all of their 5th graders to grasp the 5th grade curriculum solely because there are some kids who are capable of grasping more.")
Thank you for allowing me to clarify.
To the degree that others continue
philly103's side conversation without tying their posts back to the thread... the thread has been hijacked.
Possibly a new thread could be created for that side conversation... ?Meanwhile, I'll tie this post back to the thread by saying that grading practices and grades recorded for earlier educational levels do impact college readiness,
college grade inflation/deflation*, and ultimately even the value of degrees conferred.
*Grade deflation mentioned in article which mckinley introduced and sought feedback on: article by Patrick Julius (March 2018).
