Summary: Wouldn't we all be better if we were accountable for the quality of what we in fact do? Yes, certainly, but the measure of quality is no easy thing to construct. First, to distinguish, there are the judgements associated with planning action (polls) and the judgements associated with after the fact evaluations of actions , and consequences(ratings). This entry focuses on ratings.
Here is a sampling of "ratings" links :
- Grade the News (site run by John McManus through Stanford University's Journalism Department),
- RateMyTeachers (a site run by student volunteers with the announced purpose to:
make this website a valuable resource for both students and parents.
, - RateMyProfessors(sister site to RateMyTeachers; professor ratings based on overall quality and ease),
- Sports ratings via USA Today from Jeff Sagarin
- Ratings of countries for freedom (Freedom House),
- Ratings of consumer items at
, - A Child and Family WebGuide listing, describing and rating websites which offer topical advice to families and children via the "Web" ,
- On and on... any topic--> some kind of rating until we find
- A Guide to, actually ratings of,ratings for "any" topic at ArgusClearinghouse.
As my list illustrates, it's easy for thoughts to range widely here.
Certainly the intentions of the actor have be counted? But, equally central, are the desires of the other affected by the action. Is quality to be judged by each separately, by both jointly? If its a repeated action, a dance danced more than once, is it judged each time on the fly or by "permanent" standards . In either case both the nature and dynamics would be interesting and crucial.
A group situation is more complex, obviously. How is set of transactions in a group or larger social context to be judged? By the standards set by a committee for actors with certain roles -- or with certain intentions? By the standards set by recipients? By the desires of recipients at the onset or outset of transactions?
All of these questions, and more, surface when I think about teaching. I have to admit that I start from a biased position... which I will hold onto, at least for now, the one that says that however teaching is evaluated (rated) a(the?) central criterion will be whether the individual's potential is well served.
