Ranking, evaluating, liking Elbow

I admit that back in high school when I used to get mailings from places like Stony Brook, where some or all of the courses did not have grades, I was a little freaked out, though strangely fascinated. What it seems to boil down to, though, is that either there are fewer grades (H, U, everyone else) or merely much wordier grades in the form of lengthy evaluations. I get his argument on the problem of ranking, but in the end, he's still ranking.

I do like some of his techniques- the analytic grid, for instance, a more formalized version of the comments I've given as a tutor. Imagine if you had a stamp made of the grid, and just stamped every paper!

I don't see why you can't have traditional ranking _and_ evaluation, especially if you follow Bean's advice and keep your comments focused on how to improve rather than simply enumerating problems. Language is motivation. This is where I wish I'd brought the Critical Theory reader so I could post Philip Sidney's comments on best teaching practices (through poetry, but still). Maybe later. Anyway, blending the two would seem to ameliorate the problems of ranking and give more concrete form to the evaluation.

My favorite part, as I think others have pointed out, is the non-evaluated writing, and I'll look for ways to use that sort of stress-free exercise in class. I'd guess many students don't spend much time thinking about assignments outside of class until it's too late, so this at least would get them thinking earlier.