Recently, I’ve come across several articles about the possible future of computers grading student essays. I know there are some programs out there already doing this based on an algorithm, but I really have to wonder if they’re effectively doing their job.

For about two years, the only job I could find was grading the open-ended responses on tests given around the country. I sat at a computer for six hours a day and read essays on various topics, and then rated them based on a set rubric. We were given examples of each point value to help us determine the scores. Those caught scoring based solely on the length of the essay were given a stern talking to, and eventually invited not to return to work.

The reason for this, and why I think a computer algorithm is not going to be able to replace human scorers, is because some students were very talented at writing five pages of absolutely nothing. It would be the same sentence reworded twenty different ways. There were people who would have given this a top score because it had five pages (the maximum length), when the content actually met the criteria for a much, much lower score. Similarly, there are some very succinct writers who can effectively convey their argument in a couple of pages. The content warrants a top score, but some who were looking for length and keywords would give it a much, much lower score because of its length.

From personal experience, I think that a computer will never be able to discern the difference between a well-written concise essay and a long-winded essay that says nothing.

Articles found via Wired and Stephen Downes

I’ve been doing a lot of clearing of my Bloglines over the past couple of days, just trying to catch up.

While going through and playing Read or Scan, I came across this post from Nan Russell on her Winning at Work site. It should be noted at this point that I have some very mixed feelings about Nan Russell.

When I started reading her website, I felt like a lot of what she said made sense to me. It’s why I started reading her, and I think I keep reading in the hopes that the kindred spirit feeling will return. After reading the post I’ve linked above, though, I’m just trying to figure out if I’m too irked to continue being a member of her readership.

The post deals with how you identify experts for your sources, and it just really got to me. There is a bit where you wouldn’t take parenting advice from someone who has never been a parent. Um…excuse me. I’m child-free, and I have had many people take my advice on child-rearing since I was a teenager. Maybe this is because I started babysitting when I was ten. Maybe this is because I was handling day care centers when I was twelve. Maybe this is because I started teaching informally when I was nine, formally when I was eighteen. Maybe it’s because I spent three years as a nanny.

The point is, I have a lot of experience with children. Children naturally flock to me, and most parents are utterly impressed at the level of benevolent discipline in any group of children I work with. I’ve been asked constantly how I got such a normally unruly group under control. I’ve been asked to pass judgment on how unruly a group of children is. (This week, the answer in both cases has been: Nowhere near as bad as you seem to think they are.)

I have been seen as a child expert since I was a kid myself. I have no children. The closest I ever want to come to being a parent is through adoption or fostering. And there are still people who think I have good, practical knowledge on child-rearing.

The flip side of that is the number of parents I know who don’t have the first clue about being a parent, and don’t care to learn.

As with any job, it’s not about the fact that you’ve held the title. It’s all about those who have earned the skills by actually doing the work.

As a teacher, I’ve always seen myself more as a facilitator than the major point of knowledge. This is probably why I’ve always been drawn to guided discovery and informal teaching methods and settings.

Many students, however, are trained in formal learning methods, so when they are introduced to these alternate learning situations that put them center stage, they may have difficulty making the transition from passive to active learners.

Here’s a great post on facilitating students’ shift into active learner, while still maintaining the value of the teacher’s interactions.