Snape's (un)fair grading (just got long)

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 74849

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pen Robinson <pen at p...> wrote:

> Pen writes:
> [The current UK equivalent to O-Levels, the GCSEs, *do*
> > have a considerable element of course-work included in the final
> > grades.  > >

> > Valky replies:
> > <Argument about who "understands this" more than Valky sleeps.>
> > there is a possibility that the course work is involved. 

> > Pen Replies: 
> > Why bring it up, then?  
>

Valky writes:
> >>> Longer answer; A response like this it appears to me, actually 
begs the question.
> > Does **Snape** know that only the OWLs count on Harry's marks.
> >>
> > Pen Replies:
> > Of course he does.
> >
> > Valky replies:
> > Very well then if that's all you wish to say on the matter.
> 
> It doesn't really seem worth debating the notion that the Hogwarts 
> Potions Master has so little idea what is involved with the OWLs 
that he doesn't know whether the marks he awards count towards the 
OWLs or not.
>
Valky:
Well it did in the context of "Why did he set the test then?".
But out of this context it flails in this precise way. Now its been 
pulled out of context and turned demonstration of my debate 
incompetence I have nothing more to say. I assume that you do not 
either Pen?
 
> >>>
> >>> Why? oh why??? Would he bother awarding a zero or even setting 
the test if it has no effect on the kids marks.
> >>> Sheeesh!!!
> >>
> >> Huh?
> >>

Valky notes Pens initial friendliness. *In* the context of her next 
statements.

> >> How about, personal satisfaction for Snape, who wanted to upset
> > Harry?
> >
> > Valky's Reply:
> > Are you saying thats a fair award for Harry's work then?
> 
> Certainly not, and I have no idea how you could deduce such a thing 
> from what I did say.

Valky:
The fact that fairness is dismissed in the argument. Is Snapes 
personal satisfaction excuse enough for unfair behaviour?

Pen Continues:
You asked why he would bother awarding a zero, or even setting the 
test, if it has no effect on the marks; I offered a possible answer.  
It is so patently obvious that Snape is not giving Harry the fair 
reward for his work that I did not think it necessary to mention it.
> >
Ok
So how is that an argument that Snape grades fairly?

> >> How about, he could pretty well tell from the appearance of the
> > potion that it would get a good mark, and he couldn't bring 
himself to award one (reasons might vary from spite to a deep-cover
> > disguise).
> >
> > Valky's original reply:
> > Snape dropped the potion in a deliberate act of spite. Cover 
schmover, Blah blah blah....
> 
Pen:
> Again, I don't think much of your tone.

Valky:
Nah me either. 

Pen:
I offered a possible answer to  your 'Why?
>His motive for not wishing to award a good mark might vary from 
spite to deep-cover disguise - interpretation of motives will vary 
from reader to reader. 

Valky:
The question was "Why set the test in the first place?"

Pen adds: 
Which, incidentally, is why Snape is such a fascinating character.

Valky:
Please mind you don't inadvertantly accuse me of ignorance again.

Pen:
> >> In this respect his action is ambiguous - I mean, Snape-loathers 
can assume that he is a mean-spirited git, while at the same time
> >> Snape-lovers can assume that he knows perfectly well Harry has
> > achieved competence, but for reasons of policy must maintain the 
anti-Harry front by giving him a zero, secure in the knowledge that it
> > makes no difference to the important OWL results.
> >

Valky:
Blah Blah about me... defending my reasoning as *not* representative 
of a difficulty grasping that Snape is intriguing and one fabulous 
part of the books.

> >
> > What I am trying to relate is that the boundary you have drawn in
> > your above statement demonstrates a disregard for the truth.
> 
> What?
> 
You painted a line between Snape lovers and loathers assuming each 
could only come to one conclusion. It just jarred me that's all. I 
don't loathe any characters in the HP books (except maybe Umbridge) 
and I have found the term Snape-Loather to be too conveniently slung 
at anyone who wants to debate that Snape might be bad. If you insist 
that it wasn't a slur aimed in my direction I accept your explanation.

Pen:
> Trying, charitably, to assume that you are not being rude on 
purpose, I have to ask you why my belief that Snape's action is 
ambiguous is grounds for you to accuse me of lying.

Valky:
Not lying just leaning too heavily on a conventional untruth.

Valky:
> > _Told ya I wanted to pick a fight_ :b
>
Pen: 
> Yes, but I really don't see why you decided to pick it with me.  
> I'm not at all impressed.
> >

Pen wrote ended her introductory post thus and wonders why *I* picked 
a fight?
 
> >> As to why he would bother setting a test if it had no effect on 
the OWL grades, 

*****well, teachers do need some means of assessing their students' 
progress, don't they?********

> > This seems to be Snape's method: get the kids to make a potion and
> > see how well they've done it.  

******Seems entirely reasonable to me.*******  

Not that I learned Potions, but when I was studying for my O-Levels, 
teachers did tend to set us work, and mark it...
> >>
> >> Pen

Valky: ...............................................................
......................