Monday, September 23, 2013

Escaping the Medieval Castle: Toward a Meaningful Grading System



                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!

6 comments:

  1. 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.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Chris, 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. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark, 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.

      -Chris

      Delete
  3. LIKE! 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?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I 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