ONeill wrote:
I've always wondered why people question the grading when they've not achieved the results they had wanted. Maybe it's down to the fact I did Mathematics and exams were a clear cut case of answering the questions and getting them correct as opposed to being opportunities to demonstrate a little creativity. In my case, if I didn't do particularly well I was happy to lay the blame at my own door. Is it common for work to be graded harshly in more expressive subjects?
I can't claim to know anything about mathematics assessment, but I suspect there is clearly a "right" answer to a mathematical problem, or at least the answer the question is designed to elicit. Arts subjects are more open-ended and designed to let the student develop an argument regardless of whether it chooses to support the proposition inherent in the question or oppose it. Often there will a number of pertinent points supported by corollary assertions which may or may not form a 'good' argument to the assessor. What is "right" is subjective, according to who is marking; what they feel the correct approach is, how they would structure the argument, whether they feel comfortable with strident assertions or prefer a more academically cautious approach. Add to this mix the human factors like whether the marker is feeling magnanimous or irritable with his or her students, or whether they naturally give the benefit of the doubt or not.
You'll often hear the puzzled arts student wondering aloud why the essay they spent forever re-drafting got a middling mark, while their most recent offering, conceived and written post-hangover and a day before the deadline, managed a 17.
The Sinner.
"Apologies in advance for pedantry."