In an attempt to answer/discuss one of the questions posed…
As I think I understand it, the issue here is why Bloom equates labelling of students with judging the worthiness of content. Isn’t there a “fundamental difference,” as Dr. Mason pointed out, between labelling a student “a B student” and labelling the content of a student’s paper “B content”?
I’m not sure I agree, but I’ll try to break down the point I think Bloom is making. I believe her point is that Dewayne wasn’t really arguing that his dog was so special and wonderful that he was an “A dog” (although that is one way to look at it). Instead, what Dewayne really wanted was the professor to acknowledge that Dewayne “deserve[d] more than a B”. I think Bloom is implying an unconscious (or at least unspoken) motivation on Dewayne’s part. Yes, Dewayne picked a subject that meant a lot to him and the issue of students’ emotional attachment to their content shouldn’t be overlooked. However, when put into conversation with Bloom’s later quote—“ ‘Love me love my paper’ “—I think it is easier to see how she is offering a student’s attachment to his writing as synonymous with that student belief about himself: “If my content deserves more recognition, then ultimately so do I. And if my writing is a representation of me, then labelling it “B” automatically makes me “B” too.” If Hero deserves more than a B, Dewayne is unaffected. If Dewayne deserves more than a B, though, that’s another issue entirely.