The problem is, in our current educational system, schools and universities try to have their educationally progressive cake and eat it too. Portfolios are used to show how much a school values the process, but then they continue to play the traditional game by grading the product.

Report cards are simply not a progressive tool - using labels rather than numbers attempts to mask the authority of the report card with progressively-themed measurements.

And good old SAT scores too, I imagine. I do think it's important to question the level of privilege and understanding of how to self-advocate within a system that is necessary in order to break rank from the traditional gate-keepers. That's why I mention the SAT scores above - students can go to a gradeless school - which makes them look progressive, innovative and motivated - and still get all the private tutoring to pass SATs and have the traditional cache needed for elite institutions.

I am concerned by the use of "monitoring" in this sentence - the author seems to be suggesting that "well-meaning teachers" are training students to compare themselves and wonder "how good they are" as they read. In fact, monitoring as a reading skill is a strategic element of metacognitive regulation. (Flavell, 1979, 1987; Schraw & Dennison, 1994, in TEAL Center Fact Sheet No. 4, Metacognitive Processes, Adult Education and Literacy, U.S. Department of Education) Readers are taught to occasionally monitor their understanding of a text as they read (Do I still understand what's going on?) to ensure overall comprehension. Kohn worries that students will monitor themselves out of their reading enjoyment - but students can't enjoy what they are reading if they can't understand the text.