In my first-semester freshman composition course, the second writing project my students are assigned asks them to reconsider the purpose of higher education and present an argument in response to a pop culture "text" against the current condition of higher education. One of the issues my students sometimes choose to write about is grading. I always offer up articles I've read, some of which propose some pretty radical ideas about grading. What would college be like without grades, asks "Imagining College Without Grades", an article published in January 2009 by Inside Higher Ed.
College without grades? Preposterous!
Indeed, many view this as impossible but a lack of grades doesn't have to mean a lack of performance evaluation, and some educators are pushing for a move away from traditional letter grades for written performance evaluations. While I like this idea in theory, the amount of work it would add to already overloaded teachers makes it unfeasible as far as I can see. On the other hand, my beef with traditional letter grades, as they exist in the current system we all know and hate, is that they typically measure proficiency only and not the actual learning that is taking place. Thus, a student could earn an A in a class and not really have learned anything. Likewise, a student could earn a failing grade but have learned quite a bit. Where's the fairness in that?
Traditional letter grades don't have to be all bad, though. After all, it is a system all teachers and students alike are familiar with. We don't have to entirely redefine our grading system in order to make it work better to measure both learning and proficiency. What I propose is a tripartite grading system using the traditional letter grade we are all already familiar with that measures proficiency, progressive learning, and work ethic. I believe such a grading system would challenge all students to invest themselves more in their education and begin a shift in the students' focus from the end result--the degree--to the immediate and long term goals of learning.
This system could work one of two ways. The first is far superior, in my opinion, allowing for a much greater effect on students, teachers, and employers but would require significant changes at the university and possibly even the state level, making it incredibly difficult to implement. The second, though less effective, is more easily implemented as any teacher who wanted to adopt this practice could most likely do so simply by changing his or her grading policy in the course syllabus.
The most effective way to use this tripartite grading system would be for colleges and universities to adopt it as the means of calculating GPA, representing all three grades for each course on students' transcripts. Let's say Johnny Student works hard all semester in his freshman composition class. He reads critically, takes notes in class, meets with a writing tutor once, sometimes twice a week, revises his drafts multiple times, meets with his professor during office hours.... His writing skills greatly improve over the course of the semester, but it's still not enough. At the end of the semester, his proficiency with college writing is still 'D' work. I firmly believe Johnny deserves to be rewarded for his effort and the learning that took place. In fact, if johnny earned A's for work ethic and progressive learning, he'll probably be more inclined to approach retaking the course with a positive attitude because he knows he is capable of improving his proficiency with this particular skill. If, however, Johhny simply eans a 'D' in freshman writing course, he enters the next course feeling discouraged, as if no matter how hard he tries, it will never be good enough. Johnny is much more likely to give up.
Of course, I often have students at the other end of this spectrum. Susie Pupil makes straight A's. She doesn't try very hard because she doesn't have to and, as a result, she doesn't learn much either. Students like Susie are often bored in class becuase they aren't being challenged as much as the rest of the class. My proposed changes to the grading system would likely motivate Susie to work beyond the minimum requirements for her target proficiency grade becuase she must demonstrate that she has progressed in her learning and exerted effort in order to achieve that learning. Students like Susie typically don't like to compromise their 4.0 GPAs, so while they might resent it, they will most likley put in the necessary work to succeed in this system.
Of course, I don't believe this system would work this way for every student. Some A students might sacrifice their GPA for C's in effort and/or demonstrated learning. That's certainly their perrogative. I do believe, though, that this system would work best for the greatest number of students, especially those that fall in the middle of this spectrum. This type of grading is the best way I can think of to combat the apathy of the C student who believes that is all the better s/he can do. Knowing he can raise his overall GPA simply by putting in more effort is likely to motivate many C students to try harder, which in turn will also likely improve those students' grades in proficiency and progressive learning.
While the potential of this grading system greatly excites me, I understand that its implementation isn't the most likely thing to happen any time soon, so I have been exploring ways of implementing it just in my classes by changing my grading personal grading policies. One-third of students' grades in my classes for each proficiency, work ethic, and progressive learning. It would essentially work the same way as described above except that only one grade--the average of the three parts--would appear on a student's transcript. This method could certainly motivate students while they are in my class, but there are two significant downfalls. First, students could pass the course and move on to the next level without demonstrating passing proficiency, which only sets them up for future failure. Second, if a student still earns a failing grade, there isn't the same positive reinforcement because the work ethis and progressive learning grade are not public, i.e. not published on the transcript. Seeing only that D or F proves just as defeating as the current grading system.
Because of the drawbacks, I do not feel comfortable implementing such a grading system in my own classrooms, at least not until I find a more productive means of implemntation; however, the power of this system to reverse the apathy of today's students is undeniable, and because of this, I think we owe it to ourselves as teachers to continue exploring alternate methods of evaluation.
No comments:
Post a Comment