Today’s episode provides a critical examination of how academic grading practices often disadvantage Gestalt Language Processors (GLPs) by prioritising Analytic Language Processors (ALPs) methodologies. Specifically, the author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, argues that college settings mistakenly equate deep “analysis” with eisegesis (imposing external frameworks onto a text) whilst dismissing exegesis (fidelity to the text and internal coherence), which is the natural strength of GLPs, as mere “summary.” To address this systemic bias, Dr. Hoerricks proposes numerous GLP-affirming changes to assignment prompts, rubrics, note-taking norms, and discussion grading, ensuring that coherence mapping and pattern recognition are recognised as legitimate forms of academic rigour. She emphasises that these changes, including specific ADA/Section 504 accommodations and student advocacy scripts, are essential for moving beyond simply providing access to the classroom and instead securing access to meaningful learning for GLP students. Ultimately, she asserts that true intellectual depth is plural and that fidelity to a text must be counted as a valid form of critical thought alongside analytic overlay.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/marked-down-for-fidelity-how-colleges

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit autside.substack.com/subscribe