Grading students’ work, especially in the area of writing, is a form of “white supremacy” that must be abolished in order for black students to “achieve” at the same level as white students.
Asao Inoue, who works as associate dean for Academic Affairs, Equity, and Inclusion within the College of Integrative Sciences and Arts, contends that merit should not be a consideration when dealing with black students’ academic performance. “Anti-racism,” he says, simply does not allow for it.
In his book Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom, Inoue attempts to make the case that a student’s efforts, rather than actual performance, are what should be graded.
If it were up to Inoue, final course grades would be determined “purely by the labor students complete, not by any judgments of the quality of their writing.”
“While the qualities of student writing is [sic] still at the center of the classroom and feedback, it has no bearing on the course grade,” Inoue writes.
“Why take our judgments of quality out of the tabulation of course grades and progress in a course? Because all grading and assessment exist within systems that uphold singular, dominant standards that are racist, and White supremacist when used uniformly.”
“Single, dominant” standards for grading are racist “white supremacy”
Inoue subscribes to a “social justice agenda” that disallows inequality based on performance. If one student performs poorly and the other one exceptionally, the exceptional student could end up getting a lower grade than the poor student based on labor involved.
For instance, if the exceptional student completed A+ work in an hour and the poor student completed D+ work in four hours, the D+ student may end up receiving the higher grade because he worked harder.
To grade based on a performance standard is “racist,” according to Inoue, because often it is black and brown students who perform poorly and end up getting bad grades. To equal things out, black and brown students need to be rewarded based on perceived effort.
“Grading, because it requires a single, dominant standard, is a racist and White supremacist practice,” Inoue says.
Inoue’s 358-page book outlines how his labor-based grading system helps to promote “antiracist writing assessment ecologies” in the classroom. These “curricular changes” are needed, he says, to “help our Black students develop positive racial identity.”
In addition, Inoue wants to “destroy the White habits of language that make all the standards of language in classrooms, not to ignore them but to stop thinking they are THE keys to success and good communication, critical thinking, etc.”
Getting good grades based on performance, Inoue further tweeted about his plan, is just “one way” among “many” to deliver rewards to students. Black and brown students who are unable to perform still need good grades as well, and Inoue regularly delivers them in his classroom.
“Get a degree in engineering and the plane you design will be ‘safe enough’ because of your efforts,” joked one Campus Reform commenter about the endgame of this insanity.
“Best of all, any lawsuits from the resulting crash will be barred because you tried really hard to build the plane. You did not design and build it ‘correctly’ because that is a white supremacist’s concept which has no place in this world. The bosses came around and saw you working really hard on the plane and gave you bonuses on your efforts alone. Now you are the boss because it was racist for you not to be the boss and especially prejudicial to require any qualifications other than trying hard.”
Similar stories to this one can be found at CampusInsanity.com.
Sources for this article include: