Why is the grading system better than the more traditional marking system?

Answer 1

Well, I'm not certain that it is!

The discussion over employing the newer norm of grading over marking is one of those 'bones of contention' that is not really likely to be settled. But as it has now been the locked in policy for more than 35 years, it is unlikely to change any day soon. It was just another of the results of the complete revolution in society and in viewing life and society that began seriously during the 1960's, when there were major upheavals in addressing social problems and addressing the accepted view of life itself. It was a time of challenging religion, of challenging established ways and beliefs and social relationships. The resultant change in the perception and purpose of education, etc. included an 'out with the old and in with the new' approach that very much shook much of established society, but the new way won the day ... and as part of the major upheaval was the approach that society should orientate more towards a practicum of "cooperation" over the more traditional, "competition". The tradition of marking was perceived by this more radical 'new class' as leading to more competitive attitudes, which were perceived as being detrimental to society and smooth social function. As a result, for a time, even very little grading was employed either. But eventually, it became apparent that some form of grading system was necessary to motivate students and because of much complaint among employers, who were not able to determine a potential young employee's worth to their company without even the least grading system or assessment concerning him/her to go on.

We can just be thankful that at least we now have some form of grading, because even the young people themselves need to know where their talents and strengths and weaknesses lie.