Those involved with the grade globalization see the obvious positives of outsourcing jobs. Having Indian graduate students grade American papers cuts down costs, leaves less work for professors and provides faster and deeper evaluation on homework for students. Though there is no doubt the companies providing the services of mass grading are professional, I find something awkward about foreign grading.

The universities involved are doing a heavy amount of intellectual degradation. I believe the best kind of educational inventiveness comes from a close, specific understanding of information. My classes have worked most efficiently as a tightly knit circle of knowledge and understanding. The perpetuation of information works best kept in a box, immune to influence. Universities taking advantage of cheaper classroom costs have misled themselves into believing that students can grasp information best from a stranger. It seems reasons justifying the outsourcing were developed after institutions already had decided to use the service.

With the Virtual TAs, there is no promise the person that graded your first paper is going to be able to continue helping you. In fact, you’ll be lucky to ever see the name of your grader again. Those involved with the Virtual TAs service say the company focuses on the process, not the individual. That’s great. If sitting in a classroom of 600 didn’t already make me feel like a tiny spec in the universe, being treated as a “process” surely would.

What about American TAs? Graduate students rely on grading papers as a learning subject just as much as those being graded do. By outsourcing grading, universities are, in effect, outsourcing learning. Once the “circle of knowledge and understanding” has been broken, it is fated to absorb outside opinion that might disrupt the flow of learning. That said, I’ve always had a large respect for my TAs. They always brought a fresh view of the material, eager to help students learn. Losing that kind of support would not only be hurting the power of a degree, it would be a disappointing absence in the classroom.

I can remember times when my writing has been critiqued or edited by more than one person. What one might find to be right, the other wants to remove. I imagine having several different people review my work throughout the course of a class potentially could lead to mass confusion of what kind of development I’ve made.

I consider grading to have a very subjective tone. Virtual TAs’ attempts to twist grading to have a very objective tone — a much less effective system. In person, TAs are able to develop a personal relationship with students during the course of the semester. Grading becomes sensitive to the TA’s knowledge of a student’s past work. Students become aware of what is expected and TAs will be able to examine the student’s progression, aware of weaknesses and strengths. Without this personal growth, students are forced to develop on their own — also less effective.

I’m not for slow scholarly decay in America. I’m not keen to the idea of diluting our education system. If I wanted some kind of objective learning, I’d Google the answers to my papers. This is my personal plea to not let grading become globalized. TAs are friends, not functions.

Parker Wilson is a State News intern. Reach him at wilso881@msu.edu.