The Impact of School Competition on Educational Purpose
Contrast and debate often arise when discussing the employment of different grading methods in educational settings. This article explores the merits and drawbacks of grading on a curve versus grading on a standard, and how these methods influence the goals and motivations behind education.
Grading on a Curve vs. Grading on a Standard
Two predominant methods of grading dominate educational environments: grading on a curve and grading on a standard basis. Grading on a curve, where student performance is compared to their peers, introduces an element of competition among students. Conversely, grading on a standard involves evaluating learners based on consistent criteria, emphasizing individual improvement over relative performance.
External vs. Intraspecies Competition
External competition, as embodied in grading on a curve, is often viewed negatively due to its emphasis on intra-species rivalry. Students are pitted against one another in a struggle to secure the highest rank or grade. This approach can create significant stress, particularly when grades correlate directly with one's academic standing.
Intraspecies competition, or competition within the same group, is prevalent in daily life, from personal ambitions to career achievements. This kind of competition can be highly stressful, as individuals may not always recognize the extent of their stress due to a lack of meaningful comparison.
Grading on a standard, on the other hand, avoids this problem by focusing on a fixed set of criteria that can be applied uniformly. Unlike grading on a curve, this method can provide a more accurate measure of individual student progress, enabling comparisons on a global or national scale. This approach can alleviate the pressure of comparative evaluation, allowing students to focus on learning rather than outperforming their peers.
Consequences of School Competition
While competition in school can provide a means for self-motivation and achievement, it can also have adverse effects. Studies have shown that competition can lead to a reluctance to share information or collaborate, which are critical skills for academic success and beyond.
According to a Psychology Today article, while individuals are inherently competitive, competitive environments can reduce cooperation and the willingness to share knowledge. This diminishes the collective learning process and may stifle creativity and innovation.
Exemplifying Conditions for Competition
In many school settings, the rationale behind incorporating competition is often seen through sports, debate teams, and academic clubs. High school sports, for instance, are competitive environments that require rigorous training and often compare individual performances against those of peers.
Debate teams and band tryouts also introduce competitive elements, although the standards are generally more lenient, ensuring that nearly all students can participate at some level. However, the presence of competition in these extracurricular activities still contributes to the general atmosphere of rivalry within the educational environment.
Alternatives to Competitive Practices
Considering the negative aspects of competition in education, it is essential to explore alternative approaches. Meritocracies, which prioritize individual performance and achievement, serve as a compelling model for education.
In a meritocratic system, individuals are encouraged to strive for excellence in their own right, rather than in comparison to their peers. This environment focuses on assessment based on effort, improvement, and understanding rather than placement.
The purpose of education, therefore, is not to pit students against each other, but to foster a learning environment that encourages personal growth and development. Competition, if present, should be constructive, aiming to enhance individual capabilities rather than undermine them.
This approach aligns with the notion that the goal of school should be to facilitate learning, rather than to instill a sense of competition that can lead to stress and decreased collaboration.