There's an email going around right now about Obama's Plan in the context of a college-level economics class. While politically slanted emails are hardly new, what's surprising to me is that friends who are well read and normally moderate are forwarding this email saying how accurate it is. While I normally laugh off such emails (assuming I don't immediately delete them), I felt this one deserved some necessary correction.
First off, the original email (unchanged from how I received it):
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A... After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
Despite my frustration at receiving such a mistake-filled missive, my initial reaction was to ignore it for what it was: an inaccurate attempt to conjure up the S word to scare voters. But the more I thought about the content of the email and how normally intelligent people believed it, the more I realized this was a fictional story in need of a rewrite. After all, if we're going to engage in overly simplistic generalizations, we should at least make sure the foundation for those generalizations is correct.
What follows are two new versions of the email - feel free to make suggestions for changes, copy and paste and send it friends, or come up with your own versions and post them in the comments below. But mostly, I'm interested to know which version people here think is most effective as I'm planning to send back the favored version to my friends who sent this to me in the first place.
Rewrite Number 1 - Wealth Distribution
On the first day of the semester, an economics professor walked into a lecture hall filled with a hundred students.
"Welcome to Economics 101. Over the course of the semester, I except regular class attendance from all of you." The professor pointed to one student and said, "In addition to attending class, you will have unlimited access to ask me questions, discuss concepts, and fill in any gaps from class time."
Selecting another four students, the professor continued. "The four of you will meet with me once a week for a study session over lunch. We will discuss any questions you may have, any recent economic current events, or anything else you feel was not covered in class. You will also each be able to email me once a week with questions."
The professor looked around the hall before pointing to ten different students. "The ten of you will have the option of meeting with me during office hours for an hour after each class."
Not missing a beat, the professor selected another five students. "The five of you will have the option of meeting with me outside of class twice during the semester for ten minutes total."
The professor paused for a moment. "As for the eighty students remaining, you will not be allowed to meet with me outside of class or ask questions during class. At the end of the semester, all one hundred of you will be given the same exam. Your grade on that exam will determine your grade in this class."
Several students raised their hands. A handful said that it wasn't fair and went against university policy. Most stared at the professor in shock. The professor chuckled. "Calm down. Now, this is an economics class. And in order to study economics, you need to understand the power implicit within our economic system. You see, the breakdown just given reflects the distribution of wealth in the United States. For most of us, such statistics translate very little into our daily life. We know some people are rich and some people are poor. And within a capitalist system, we recognize that rewarding success and initiative helps society as a whole. The question is, at what point does such a distribution limit success?"
The lecture hall was quiet again, and most of the hands were no longer raised.
"I'm not going to hold this class to the rules given. All of you will have equal access to me during class, office hours, and over email. At the end of the semester, all of you will take the exam, and all of you will receive a grade based off your performance during that exam. But throughout this semester, I want you to think about how your semester would be different if we had used the breakdown I gave. Would you have done better or worse? And how do we find the balance between rewarding success and giving everyone the tools to have a fair shot at success? I know most of you think you know the answer, but let me caution you right now: it's never as simple as it seems or as black and white as we want it to be."
Rewrite Number 2 - No Student Left Behind
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class.
The class had insisted that Obama's socialism did not work and that no one would have any motivation to study.
The professor listened and then said, "Let me suggest we try an experiment this semester using the so-called 'Obama Plan.' Over the course of the semester, we will have three exams. You will receive a grade on each exam which will represent how you did on that exam - except if anyone fails the exam. If one person fails, everyone fails."
Before the first test, most of the students studied alone, only concerned about how they did on the exam. When the exam was returned, students were angry that everyone received an F.
The students who studied hard were upset and blamed the students who failed. They yelled at the professor and said it wasn't fair to be punished for someone else not caring. The professor replied, "Is it that they do not care, or that they need help to succeed?"
As the second test rolled around, some of the students organized a study group and offered to help out the students who had not done well on the previous test. The students who did well on the test made it clear they found the whole thing ridiculous and made sure to remind the students they were helping what a huge sacrifice this was and how those students were stupid.
On the second test, no one failed, but some students received Ds.
The professor then announced that for the last exam, if no one received lower than a C, only the last exam would count towards the final grade. He also suggested that rather than treating some students as stupid or dead weight, the class work together and find each student's strength.
Reluctantly, the entire class worked together, and students who had done well all semester found that helping other students learn the material helped them as well. It also gave them an opportunity to get to know other students outside of class. For students who had struggled during the class, they no longer feared being called stupid and asked questions more easily. As a result, the entire class had a better grasp of the material, enabling all of them to get more out of the class and go into the third test prepared.
When the final test rolled around, no student scored lower than a B.
After the students had congratulated each other, the professor explained why he had structured the grading as he had. "At the beginning of the semester, all of you were individuals who cared only about your own life and interests. Then you reluctantly helped each other because you had to. Finally, all of you helped each other because all of you would benefit in some way and, as a result, all of you succeeded. And that's what the Obama Plan is about - not about taking away the rewards of success, but about working together to help everyone have a shot at that success."