|Sent on:||Friday, May 10, 2013 5:39 PM|
Posted: 10 May[masked]:26 AM PDT
After sitting in the room for two and a half hours to answer questions that came up during the exam and deter cheating, grading would require the next four hours. I have a very particular method I use when grading these exams. It starts with preparing a detailed key in the weeks before the exam so that I know exactly what I am looking for when I evaluate students' responses to each question. Next, I place removable opaque tape over the students' name on each exam to prevent me from knowing whose exam I am grading. My colleagues make fun of me for insisting on doing my grading only after I am blind to the identity of the students, but I am convinced that it helps guard against unintentional bias.
With the necessary preparation out of the way, I grade question-by-question. That is, I read question 1, my response to question 1 from the key, and each students' response to question 1 before I do any actual grading. I grade those responses that clearly got the content I wanted first and progress to the responses containing significant errors or omissions. I take great care to make sure that each error or omission is treated the same way with regard to how many points it costs the student. And I repeat this process question-by-question until I am finished.
The process does take awhile, but it strikes me as worthwhile. I want to make sure I am grading in the fairest manner possible. I believe my students deserve that, even if they might not always appreciate the final outcome. We all make mistakes, and we are all subject to bias. Because the bias to which we fall victim is rarely intentional - or even conscious - taking steps to guard against it makes good sense.
A Lesson for the Secular Community?
Perhaps there is a lesson for those of us in the secular community in here somewhere. When our decisions are biased in some manner, we are often the last to know. It might behoove us to take active measures to guard against bias. What might this look like? Here are a few ideas:
Subscribe to Atheist Revolution
Posted: 09 May[masked]:05 PM PDT
Critics of the Jesus narrative have pointed out that the nature of the contemporaneous historical writing we do have from the time period is such that it seems highly likely that Jesus would have received considerable attention if the events described in the Christian bible had taken place as described. Where are the alleged miracles and the resurrection itself? Without this sort of record, it is difficult to determine which - if any - portions of the biblical narrative should be regarded as historical vs. mythical.
To be clear, the problem is not simply the lack of written records of Jesus at this time. It is even worse than that. The problem is that the evidence we have leads us to expect that if the Jesus story contained in the Christian bible was accurate, portions of it would have been present in the written records (e.g., the miracles attributed to Jesus). Because these events are nowhere to be found, it seems unlikely that it happened much like what was described in the Christian bible.
What we know from the contemporaneous non-Christian records is that someone named Jesus probably lived around the time of the biblical Jesus, that he was crucified, and that some of his contemporaries may have considered him to be a messiah of sorts. Beyond that, we seem to have lots of speculation and little else.
Subscribe to Atheist Revolution
|You are subscribed to email updates from Atheist Revolution
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|