Episode 6: Metrics

The HBS hosts take a look at the pros and cons of several metrics by which we are rated and ranked. We talk about grading, student evaluations, the Philosophical Gourmet Report (ranking professional Philosophy programs), social media algorithms, China’s social credit systems, and others. We also delve into some of Cathy O’Neal’s arguments in *Weapons of Math Destruction.* 

Today’s episode takes a look at many of the ways that metrics work in our day to day lives. Leigh, Ammon, and Shannon take on the various ways we are all dominated by rankings and ratings. Are there better and worse ways to rank and rate ourselves and others? What are we doing when we grade our students? Is it really a fair assessment of their achievements or deeply biased and problematic? What are we doing when we evaluate each other in the academy and when our institutions evaluate our performance as scholars, teachers, and researchers? Is there a way to rank programs objectively or does the very act of ranking produce the results it claims to merely discover? Finally, given that we are being rated and ranked by hidden algorithmic metrics all the time, is it better to have social ranking systems centralized in a government or spread out across the private sector?

For further reading, check out the links below:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *