On 21/09/2011 12:09 PM, clipka wrote:

> I didn't contradict that fixed criteria for a grade are superior to
> variable grades; all I said was that non-fixed grades are also able to
> do the job grades were invented for.

Fair enough.

> That aside, I don't think that there is such thing as "ideal" when it
> comes to grades. They're just a kludge to rate a person's capabilities
> anyway. Your math grade doesn't tell much about whether you'd make a
> good accountant; your native language grade doesn't tell much about
> whether you'd make a good news reporter; your informatics grade doesn't
> tell much about whether you'd make a good system administrator, database
> engineer or software developer.
>
> Actually, an employer's primary concern may often be stuff that's not in
> the grades at all: Soft skills. Are you good at communicating with
> others? Are you good at motivating yourself/others? How do you perform
> under pressure? Are you good at cooperation (teamwork)? Are you good at
> competition (marketing strategies)?

Grades in hard subjects are supposedly proxies for soft skills. That's 
supposedly why having a degree in philosophy is useful; it proves that 
you're capable of working hard enough and staying focused long enough to 
earn a degree. And supposedly that you have critical thinking skills and 
so forth.

I still think philosophy degrees are pointless. :-P

Post a reply to this message