Author: Celia Popovic
- Assessment always drives learning
- While most would agree that learning without assessment is difficult to quantify, some would also argue that giving precedence to assessment over the learning experience can skew student (and teacher) behaviour. This can lead to teaching to the test, where the learning itself is secondary to the student's ability to get a good grade. As with so much in life, balance is important.
- We can meaningfully mark/assess to 1%
- Grading almost always involves some measure of subjective judgement. Even in a quantitative math exam, judgement determined the selection of exam questions. There may be a right or wrong answer, but what does a right answer actually tell you, or a wrong one? Despite the wide range of variants that contribute to the design of an assessment, it is common for the grading system to imply an unwarranted precision. Can you really distinguish between a performance that warrants a 76% rather than a 75% or a 77%. As an aside, it is also interesting to note the variance in expectation between different educational systems. For example, a B+ in the UK is regarded as quite respectable, in Canada it is close to a fail!
- Expect a normal distribution of grades
- There are programs that mark to the curve. This will be completely normal for some and a matter or surprise and concern for others. Marking to the curve is based on the idea that in any collection of data there is a normal distribution. This produces a curve in which a minority are in the lower 10% and the upper 10% and most are in the middle 80%. On this basis it is expected that a few will get the top and bottom grades and the rest will be in the middle. Thus if all the students get an A or all the students fail, there must be something wrong with the grading system. Indeed, in some programs the grades are distributed according to a predetermined curve. This would mean that a student who got 90% in a course might be told he has an A in one year when few of his peers achieved 90% or higher, while in another year might get a B if a larger number of his peers gained 91% or higher.
- Why is this a problem? A group of students in a course are not an example of a normal population and cannot therefore be expected to conform to a normal distribution of grades. If grading is a measure of knowledge it should be equally possible for all students to gain the top marks or for all students to fail. If grading is a measure of comparison, then that is a different story.
- Criteria based marking provides what many would see as a fairer method, and one that is more useful to an individual student or potential employee. See this explanation from the University of Tasmania.
- Feedback Sandwich
- This is the notion that criticism is easier to take if it is 'sandwiched' between praise. Less polite commentators have dubbed this the sh*t sandwich! While it may be more comfortable for a teacher to deliver bad news backed up by pleasantries there is no evidence that students are more likely to hear the criticism or to react to it positively if it is delivered before, after or in between the good news. Feedback should be relevant to the work, be something the student can change and give guidance as to how to make a change. Comments such as Good!, or What?, are far less helpful than specific meaningful guidance.
- Feedback is useful after summative assessment
- Once a grade has been given, how many students are interested in feedback? This is the question posed by those who disagree that feedback is always useful. However, there are examples of excellent assessment strategies where feedback from one part of the programme feeds into later parts.
*************************************************************************************************
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
