{"id":111,"date":"2016-03-18T13:50:39","date_gmt":"2016-03-18T17:50:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/?p=111"},"modified":"2018-02-15T13:51:01","modified_gmt":"2018-02-15T18:51:01","slug":"changing-the-grading-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/2016\/03\/18\/changing-the-grading-game\/","title":{"rendered":"Changing the Grading Game"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mark Oppenheimer<\/a><\/span>\u2018s recent\u00a0Washington Post article<\/span><\/a>, \u201cThere\u2019s Nothing Wrong With Grade Inflation,\u201d widens the lens in useful ways on the conversation around grading in higher education.\u00a0The inflation of grades is not\u00a0the problem, he suggests, though it is problematic in many ways. The real problem, he says, is grades in general, and I tend to agree.<\/p>\n

Grades have historically been viewed\u00a0as markers of a student\u2019s progress, knowledge, and skill, both to students themselves and to potential employers and graduate schools who may be evaluating them in the future. The fear over grade inflation generally circles around the idea that if everyone gets an A, an A becomes meaningless. How will institutions distinguish\u00a0top candidates from the rest, people wonder. How will students be motivated if measures of their achievement are artificial?<\/p>\n

But as Oppenheimer points out, grades don\u2019t serve either purpose particularly well,\u00a0regardless of whether they are inflated. In other words, that A is already meaningless. Employers and grad schools\u00a0have realized that grades are poor indicators of an applicant\u2019s abilities and are seeking other measures. And while students may appear motivated by\u00a0grades, that motivation seems\u00a0to extend only to\u00a0the grade itself, and not\u00a0to the learning that is supposedly associated with it. As a result, students learn to take the path of least resistance to a high grade\u2013often a shallower, more superficial learning experience.\u00a0Jessica Lahey<\/span><\/a>\u00a0echoed this idea at a recent talk at Dartmouth:<\/p>\n

Extrinsic motivators like grades make us less creative, less dedicated and less personally invested in the task at hand.<\/b><\/p>\n

We know this; research has reflected this for more than 40 years (Oppenheimer cites studies from the\u00a01970s<\/span><\/a>,\u00a01980s<\/span><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a01990s<\/span><\/a>.) And yet we continue to employ grading as the primary, if not only, mode of student assessment and fight mighty battles over the tragedy of inflation.<\/p>\n

Add to these relative failures the fact that grading is a tool that\u00a0perpetuates inequality. Ironically (tragically, predictably), it is the students for whom grades matter less\u2013as Oppenheimer says, \u201cstudents at elite schools, who get jobs based on references, prestige and connections\u201d\u2013whose grades have generally risen over time while the grades of their counterparts at less elite institutions have fallen.<\/p>\n

Oppenheimer goes on to\u00a0express the thing that, as a teacher, I found most alarming about the whole grading process:<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve taught humanities subjects for 15 years, and I still can\u2019t say very well what separates a B from an A.<\/b><\/p>\n

Grading, at least in fields where there is no \u201cright answer,\u201d\u00a0is largely\u00a0subjective and varies dramatically from instructor to instructor. While efforts to bring objectivity to the process\u2013anonymizing student work, incorporating descriptive rubrics, providing models of successful artifacts\u2013bring greater clarity to the process for students, they do little to alleviate the interpretive nature of the task.<\/p>\n

So, grading is a problem. Oppenheimer says,\u00a0\u201cWe need to move to a post-grading world. Maybe that means a world where there are no grades \u2014 or one where, if they remain, we rely more on better kinds of evaluation.\u201d\u00a0My experience at a somewhat non-traditional graduate school helps to illustrate some of the alternative approaches Oppenheimer\u2019s article\u00a0suggests.<\/p>\n

Applicants to\u00a0Antioch University New England<\/span><\/a>\u00a0do not have to submit GRE scores, and students are not given traditional grades. Coursework is evaluated using descriptive comments, and overall performance reviews are delivered in narrative form. As a student, I felt complete ownership over my learning and was compelled to define the purpose, meaning and outcome of the experience for myself. I had rich, personal relationships with my professors that helped to guide me in this pursuit.<\/p>\n

And while this was wonderful for me and, I think, a generally admirable\u00a0model of education, it is simply untenable as a large-scale solution. In his last few paragraphs,\u00a0Oppenheimer cautions against simple solutionism,\u00a0explaining how meaningful evaluation of this kind takes more time, a commodity not freely flowing in education. He goes on to say that this kind of educational approach privileges those with greater privilege as it is: students at smaller schools with lower student-teacher ratios, faculty with tenure and time to give. It goes without saying that this is a minority of students and teachers.<\/p>\n

There is a need for connected, systemic change in places where innovation is bubbling on the margins.\u00a0Badging<\/span><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0e-portfolios<\/span><\/a>\u00a0offer alternatives to traditional grading structures.\u00a0Team-based learning<\/span><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0peer assessment\u00a0<\/span><\/a>can help to shift the conversation. Schools that embrace the\u00a0move away from standardized testing requirements<\/span><\/a>\u00a0are a bright spot in the landscape. There is reason to be hopeful for a change.<\/p>\n

What are you seeing that is changing the grading game? What approaches can scale? What structures might we build to enable different possibilities?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mark Oppenheimer\u2018s recent\u00a0Washington Post article, \u201cThere\u2019s Nothing Wrong With Grade Inflation,\u201d widens the lens in useful ways on the conversation around grading in higher education.\u00a0The inflation of grades is not\u00a0the problem, he suggests, though it is problematic in many ways. The real problem, he says, is grades in general, and I tend to agree. Grades have historically been viewed\u00a0as markers of a student\u2019s progress, knowledge, and skill, both to students themselves and to potential employers and graduate schools who may be evaluating them in the future. The fear over grade inflation generally circles around the idea that if everyone gets an A, an A becomes meaningless. How will institutions distinguish\u00a0top candidates from the rest, people wonder. How will students be motivated if measures of their achievement are artificial? But as Oppenheimer points out, grades don\u2019t serve either purpose particularly well,\u00a0regardless of whether they are inflated. In other words, that A is already meaningless. Employers and grad schools\u00a0have realized that grades are poor indicators of an applicant\u2019s abilities and are seeking other measures. And while students may appear motivated by\u00a0grades, that motivation seems\u00a0to extend only to\u00a0the grade itself, and not\u00a0to the learning that is supposedly associated with it. As a result, students learn to take the path of least resistance to a high grade\u2013often a shallower, more superficial learning experience.\u00a0Jessica Lahey\u00a0echoed this idea at a recent talk at Dartmouth: Extrinsic motivators like grades make us less creative, less dedicated and less personally invested in the task at hand. We know this; research has reflected this for more than 40 years (Oppenheimer cites studies from the\u00a01970s,\u00a01980s\u00a0and\u00a01990s.) And yet we continue to employ grading as the primary, if not only, mode of student assessment and fight mighty battles over the tragedy of inflation. Add to these relative failures the fact that grading is a tool that\u00a0perpetuates inequality. Ironically (tragically, predictably), it is the students for whom grades matter less\u2013as Oppenheimer says, \u201cstudents at elite schools, who get jobs based on references, prestige and connections\u201d\u2013whose grades have generally risen over time while the grades of their counterparts at less elite institutions have fallen. Oppenheimer goes on to\u00a0express the thing that, as a teacher, I found most alarming about the whole grading process: I\u2019ve taught humanities subjects for 15 years, and I still can\u2019t say very well what separates a B from an A. Grading, at least in fields where there is no \u201cright answer,\u201d\u00a0is largely\u00a0subjective and varies dramatically from instructor to instructor. While efforts to bring objectivity to the process\u2013anonymizing student work, incorporating descriptive rubrics, providing models of successful artifacts\u2013bring greater clarity to the process for students, they do little to alleviate the interpretive nature of the task. So, grading is a problem. Oppenheimer says,\u00a0\u201cWe need to move to a post-grading world. Maybe that means a world where there are no grades \u2014 or one where, if they remain, we rely more on better kinds of evaluation.\u201d\u00a0My experience at a somewhat non-traditional graduate school helps to illustrate some of the alternative approaches Oppenheimer\u2019s article\u00a0suggests. Applicants to\u00a0Antioch University New England\u00a0do not have to submit GRE scores, and students are not given traditional grades. Coursework is evaluated using descriptive comments, and overall performance reviews are delivered in narrative form. As a student, I felt complete ownership over my learning and was compelled to define the purpose, meaning and outcome of the experience for myself. I had rich, personal relationships with my professors that helped to guide me in this pursuit. And while this was wonderful for me and, I think, a generally admirable\u00a0model of education, it is simply untenable as a large-scale solution. In his last few paragraphs,\u00a0Oppenheimer cautions against simple solutionism,\u00a0explaining how meaningful evaluation of this kind takes more time, a commodity not freely flowing in education. He goes on to say that this kind of educational approach privileges those with greater privilege as it is: students at smaller schools with lower student-teacher ratios, faculty with tenure and time to give. It goes without saying that this is a minority of students and teachers. There is a need for connected, systemic change in places where innovation is bubbling on the margins.\u00a0Badging\u00a0and\u00a0e-portfolios\u00a0offer alternatives to traditional grading structures.\u00a0Team-based learning\u00a0and\u00a0peer assessment\u00a0can help to shift the conversation. Schools that embrace the\u00a0move away from standardized testing requirements\u00a0are a bright spot in the landscape. There is reason to be hopeful for a change. What are you seeing that is changing the grading game? What approaches can scale? What structures might we build to enable different possibilities?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=111"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":112,"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111\/revisions\/112"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elligoudzwaard.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}