After
almost 30 years of teaching, I am still haunted every semester by the specter
of grading. I feel trapped in this
medieval castle, where all the secret doors, tunnels and escape routes are
labeled with huge As, Bs, Cs, Ds or Fs.
I anguish over an 89 percent versus a 91 percent. I wonder aloud at the purpose of grades. Are they really for students? Employers? University Admissions committees? Scholarship
boards? In the big picture and long run, does our grading system really serve our
students’ learning? Or by it are we
inculcating behaviors that move them to be automatons, slaves to what they
think instructors want rather than focusing on conquering ideas and skills that would be really
helpful? Does our current system really
motivate students to learn, or is it
a system of punishments and rewards that ultimately teaches our
students how to “play the system,” and even cheat to succeed?
What if
we could make grading less punitive, and more about mastering the concepts we so much
want them to learn? In this vein, I have
been experimenting the last couple of semesters. Here’s the gist of my modified grading system:
1.
There are four possible grades:
A, B, C and U. (The “U” carries
all the negative consequences of a failing grade, without the
disastrous GPA consequences.)
2.
Students need to complete 90% of the coursework at an acceptable level to pass the
class, else they receive a
“U.”
3.
If an assignment is submitted that is NOT up to standards, it is returned
(with comments and suggestions), and can be resubmitted within three weeks of the original due date. Students can resubmit
assignments as many times as they want or need to in order to “get” the
concept.
4.
Student whose first submission of 90% of their work is on time (that is, 80% of all assignments)
receive the highest grade.
The big pro to this method is that it encourages
mastery learning, not just going through motions to meet some arbitrary point
value. Also, as an instructor, I don’t
have to struggle over microscopic differences in points—students either master
the concept or they get another shot.
The big
con is that I do more grading. But this really has two hidden pros: My grading goes faster because I’m not
slavishly agonizing over minutiae, and I am more confident that my students are actually
LEARNING!
No
grading system is perfect, and this one certainly is not. But neither is it as capricious, arbitrary or
punitive. And most of all, it focuses
on learning, not grades. So far, students seem to be rising to the challenge,
and appreciating the opportunity to really learn!
Mark - I like the new system of grading - not so punitive. Extra grading is a bummer, but it - for me - would depend a great deal on the attitude of the student.
ReplyDeleteChris, My limited experience with this is that the students appreciate the emphasis on learning (as opposed to grades), and their attitudes actually IMPROVE toward the class. We'll see if that holds up. :)
ReplyDeleteMark, I totally agree that I like YOUR system of grading, and I know that students appreciate learning vs. grading. I have returned assignments with a ton of suggestions; met with students; gone the extra mile. It's just that I appreciate when they at least meet me half-way, or they appreciate that I don't just 'grade' the work.
Delete-Chris
Oh, I get that!! :)
DeleteLIKE! Mastery is one of the key components in gamification, as is the ability to do-over (re-spawn). Did you know that you were part of this hip education movement?
ReplyDeleteI had no idea that I was that "hip." :) Funny... Mastery learning has been around LONG BEFORE the "hip" gaming stuff appeared on the scene!
Delete