In my last post, I began discussing alternatives to the standard letter grade and mostly wrote about using narratives for evaluating work. Tonight, I'd like to discuss the use of criteria and grading rubrics.
Criterion-based grading, for me, is a large improvement on the standard math teacher grading system (i.e. add up points earned and divide by points possible to get a percentage that converts to a letter). I use criterion-based grading exclusively in my Senior Stats course. Here is an example of grading rubric I used this year.
Here is how I use my rubric. I read through the project as a whole, making notes and comments as I go. I then evaluate each criterion, one by one. Each criterion has various achievement levels. Some go from 0 to 2, others from 0 to 4. In order to reach a level 2, a project must satisfy all of levels 1 and 2. To reach level 3, a project must satisfy all the requirements of all 3 descriptions.
I attempt to write the descriptions as plainly as possible and in a logical progression so that attaining a higher level should show an improved understanding. For example, take my "Displays" criterion. To reach level 1, a student must only create one correct display that is relevant to the project topic. Level 2 is attained if a student makes multiple types of displays. So making 2 different histograms would be insufficient. Making a histogram and a boxplot would satisfy the description. In each case, the displays must be made "correctly," meaning, in part, that they should be accurate and be labeled sufficiently. To reach level 3, the displays must "communicate well" and have a "high level of accuracy." Essentially, this is a way for me to distinguish between the student that makes a few sloppy displays and the student who makes a few excellent displays. Finally, level 4 requires a certain degree of sophistication within the displays. This means that they are all effective and lead to insightful analysis. There is a level of complexity within the displays.
So, I evaluate the project against all of the criteria. I write narrative comments for each criterion to explain why a certain level was awarded. I note errors as well as strengths. This example will give you a taste of what I try to do each time (you can zoom in on the image to make it large enough to read).
In the end, however, by using achievement levels, what I've really done is assign a variety of grades to a project. In a sense, I've given a student a "letter" grade for their introduction, another for their data, one for their calculations, and so on. So, I feel like I'm not exactly moving away from the letter grade entirely. And, given where I teach, in the end, I do have to assign an actual letter grade to the project. So, I do my voodoo and do that. More on my voodoo in another post. I'm tired. Good night.
You note the reservation I have about rubrics: they simply parcel out the subjectivity of grading into smaller packages. By numericizing the exercise--putting a score to increasingly minute increments of judgment--they risk creating the illusion of objectivity merely because there are numbers involved.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I also worry with rubrics that they don't adequately assess the totality of a piece of work, while at the same time potentially assessing its parts harshly. A two-point item has, in effect, three possible assessment outcomes: "perfect" (2), "failing by a little" (1), and "failing by a lot" (0). This is how they play out from a numerical perspective, anyway, assuming a norm-referenced system of grading.
You express an interest in and preference for criterion-referenced grading systems, and it would be interesting to know how this interest might play out practically with the rubric you describe in your post. It could put to rest some of the above problems with their use.
For me, the rubric's benefit comes largely from the mentor perspective of the teacher's role. To the extent that rubrics parcel out the particular significant components of the task and its outcome, it has the potential to provide robust and useful feedback.
But from the gatekeeper perspective, the rubric can be, to my way of thinking, too exacting. Indeed, in this weakness, its cost to the student who needs most to learn what the rubric can teach may inhibit or foreclose its benefit.
I use various grading systems in my AP Physics course, depending on the assignment: rubrics of varying granularity (for lab reports), straight "points for correct answers" (for tests), and subjective evaluation with written comments (for some larger assignments). While each system has its strengths and weaknesses, they all amount to an evaluation of the student's progress in the course, which is not just something I do "given where I teach": it's an essential component of the feedback loop, vital to making progress.
ReplyDeleteI seek feedback of all sorts in my own development in lots of different areas: my ability to teach, my relationship, personal projects, etc. Without honest feedback on my strengths and weaknesses, I don't have any idea of how to progress, and how to improve.
So feedback is necessary, and recommendations to colleges are necessary. And although I'm well aware of studies that indicate less-than-perfect correlation between High School GPA and First Year (College) GPA, and between SAT score and FYGPA, these measures, along with a few other items like essays and teacher recs, are all we have. For the moment, anyway.
Java Junkie, I'm calling you on this: you can disparage various evaluation processes by calling them "voodoo," but what's your answer? What's your silver bullet that gives a student feedback and provides meaningful information to others regarding that student's progress?
If you've got the answer, we deserve to hear it! :)
Dear Rwhite,
ReplyDeleteSo, I had a nice long detailed comment all written up to respond to you and thanks to the voodoo of the internet: poof! it went away... argh.
A silver bullet? No, I have no such thing. The grading system to which I referred will be explained in my next post. But I do not think it is an ideal system, just an improvement on the standard math teacher system I mentioned above. My voodoo comment in my post referred only to my grading system and not to anyone else's. I call it voodoo because some students in the past have said they don't understand it. My feeling has always been that they haven't tried and that they say that because it's different from other math teachers. Also, I use the word voodoo because why should a 75% on a math quiz magically mean "satisfactory" work?
In fact, I think evaluation plays a vital role in education for the same reason you mentioned: it provides students with valuable feedback. What I cannot stand is the overuse of the letter grade in evaluation. I feel that many teachers rely too much on letter grades for giving feedback. Letter grades provide very little in the form of feedback.
This hits on the purpose of this blog. Evaluation is important. My quest is to find superior methods of evaluation and to diminish the over-reliance on letter grades. It's also in part because students can become fixated on a certain letter grade and strive only to produce work that will get a certain grade. I know this affected my work as a student and I suspect it affects many students I teach.
The mixture of evaluation systems is totally appropriate and actually is more what I want to do. Different forms of assessment may require different kinds of evaluation. And, different kinds of evaluation allow a student (and educator) to get a more complete picture of how a student is progressing or not.
I also use evaluation as you do: to provide me with feedback on my teaching. I keep every Stats project and their evaluation sheets and I will use them for comparison purposes. This allows me to see if I am improving at explaining and emphasizing certain ideas and skills and I use it to guide my lessons, lectures, labs, and the like.
To Senor egwugwu's comment, in my stats class, I give the students the our rubric with the project assignment so they know ahead of time specifically what I will assess. There is no grammar criterion on purpose because I am not an English teacher and I can still understand quite well what they are saying if they use "good" as an adverb. But, I normally assess communication and so if they have a bunch of poorly written sentences, this will affect their communication.
You commented about norm-referenced style of grading. This, too, I will blog about some day. But, on to bed!!