How to Avoid Bludgeoning Students

How to Avoid Bludgeoning Students

In The Chronicle of Higher Education article that I chose for this week, David Brooks humorously reflects on his six years as a Teaching Assistant and how he refined his ability to grade papers.  He explains how when he was new to grading papers he filled the margins with comments and corrections in an attempt to assert his authority over his students and prevent them from questioning the grades he gave them.  However, he eventually learned to use his comments to help his students improve their writing and work through their ideas. 

I definitely recommend this article to everyone in our class who is a Teaching Assistant or new to grading papers.  In fact, I am attaching it to this post in a Word document so it will be easy to access.  Brooks’ writing is not overly academic, though he clearly has an authoritative voice.   

 This article struck me immediately because it’s title, “Wielding the Red Pen,” reminded me of our in-class discussion about how blunt to be with our comments on papers.  I liked Brooks’ solution to this dilemma because he suggests that teachers should actually withhold full disclosure of a student’s mistakes.  He says that he will write comments that challenge students to investigate their mistakes:  “In the margins of a test or paper, I pose questions that encourage students to decipher their errors, rather than bludgeon them with my recognition of those errors. I favor a few comments at the end of a paper that assess the work as a whole” (3).

I completely agree that teachers’ comments should challenge a student to rethink their papers and ideas, instead of simply telling them when they are wrong.  Brooks said that his probing, indirect comments resulted in his students meeting with him to discuss how they could improve their papers.  In this light it, seems that comments can also serve to extend the learning experience of the paper itself.  Grading papers is certainly an art and I realize that I have much more to learn before I am an effective and efficient grader; however, Brooks offers a nice starting point for new teachers.  Do not bludgeon students with comments; instead encourage them to investigate their missteps.      

Brooks, David. “Wielding the Red Pen.” The Chronicle of Higher Education 57.24 (2011).

   Educator's Reference Complete. Web. 17 Mar. 2011.

Assessing Teachers?

This week I decided to write about effective teacher assessment, instead of effective student assessment.  In Alexis Wiggins’ article, “The Courage to Seek Authentic Feedback,” she asserts that student surveys are vital to improving her teaching methods and determining students’ learning needs.  The end of year surveys of her high-school English class provided such useful insights that she even implemented a mid-term class survey.  She cites an example where her mid-term survey revealed that most students wanted to study more grammar, and therefore dispelled the cries of a few students who complained about the grammar lessons.   After years of conducting pen and paper student surveys of her teaching, Wiggins took a faculty paper survey and realized that she was afraid the administration would recognize her handwriting.  Wiggins now claims that her new online surveys allow student to be more honest than they were before and discuss touch issues such as grading, favoritism, course materials. 

I find Wiggins’ story of survey success overly optimistic.  She says that no student has ever used the online surveys to personally attack her.  She also seems to imply that the surveys allow her to resolve all pedagogy issues. 

I believe that teacher designed, online mid-term surveys in a college course could offer the professor a way to monitor the atmosphere and progress of the class.  However, it seems like designing an anonymous online survey could give the students a place to voice personal attacks against the teacher.  It seems that the success of the survey would depend on the temperament of the class in general.  It could not be a mandatory survey and still stay anonymous. 

I personally think that periodic anonymous, one-minute papers would involve less work and provide a more regular barometer for student lesson comprehension.  Though, according to Wiggins, the written format would mean that students might be afraid to really voice their opinions.   

I will reserve my final verdict on the effectiveness of online teacher surveys until I have the opportunity to test them in a class for myself.

Wiggins, Alexis. “The Courage to Seek Authentic Feedback.” Education Digest 76.7 (2011): 19-21.  Educator's Reference Complete. Web. 1 Mar. 2011.

Gambling for Grades

Gambling for Grades

This week, I listened to a National Public Radio broadcast that explores issues surrounding, Ultrinsic, an online website that allows students to wager on their grades and earn.  A student’s profit is based on a formula that considers their past performance and expected performance, and students are only rewarded when they exceed expectations.

The founders of the company claim that by law this is not gambling because grades are not based on chance (the legal definition of gambling involves a game of chance) they are earned with skill.

The founders of Ultrinsic claim that they are not currently focused on profiting from the website but only want to spread the idea of “incentivized” grades.  They claim to be providing a service to students by giving them a monetary incentive to improve their grades.  This “service” was available to students at thirty-six colleges at the time of broadcast; UCF is not one of the schools on the Ultrinisic website . 

My initial reaction to this was disgust, and my feelings remained the same, even after I listened to the rest of the broadcast. 

I truly feel that this company is taking advantage of an emotionally and monetarily unstable population.  I can understand why they wanted to go on NPR and encourage a positive image to their “incentivized” grade program because they want to spread the myth that they are helping students perform better.

If a student needs the possibility of losing money to motivate them to study, then it does not seem that they have the proper motivation needed to succeed in college.  Jeremy Gelbart, one of the founders of Ultrinisic said: “We know this is an ulterior motive, but we think that when students are - when they would have a choice between going ahead and partying versus going to study for the books, they're going to choose study for the books because they're going to get the extra dollar” (14:30).

Also, this “incentive program” offers the biggest monetary payouts to students who have lower grades and improve; so, their customers may be in danger of losing scholarships, and if they fail to improve they will lose money to Ultrinisic.

I cringed when Gelbart, justified taking money from college students, who are most likely in debt, by saying that this was their fee for providing grade motivation services.

Am I closed-minded to reject this idea completely?  I am curious how everyone else feels about this.  

Here is a link to their website:  http://www.ultrinsic.com/about.html

“New Website Lets Students Bet on Grades.” Narr. Neal Conan. Talk of the Nation. Natl. Public Radio.

                2010. NPR Internet Archive. Web. 17 Feb. 2011.  

Do Students Benefit More from Strict or Lenient Grades?

            I chose to review this article because it tries to answer a fundamental grading question: if grades are supposed to motivate students, are they more motivated by lower or higher grades?  The article describes past studies illustrating that a strict grading scale motivates students to put more effort into their coursework and learned more.  However, it also points to studies where the opposite result was found; students pushed to work harder by a stricter grading scale were stressed emotionally and mentally and did not learn as much due to the stress they encountered.  Additionally, it was found that while some individual students may work harder when exposed to a stricter grading scale, others may give up when faced with tougher standards, or be completely neutral to the situation (Elikai and Schuhmann 679).  In general, past studies supported the belief that higher standards result in most students earning higher grades (682).  

            I found it interesting that the researchers noted that logically people will work harder if incentives are great enough (higher grades).  Strangely, this did not hold true for classes where students were not required to take the course for their major.  Therefore, for their study they chose an accounting class required for the major; if students dropped the course they would also need to change majors.    

            The results of the study showed that students evaluated with a stricter grading scale performed better and received higher grades.  Contrary to previous studies, the researchers found that lower-achieving students earned higher grades on the strict scale.  Also, fewer students dropped the class possibly because they were more invested in the coursework (690).  On another note, the different grading standards did not affect the teacher’s performance reviews, which were almost the same for all classes.

            When I began reading this article, I thought that lower-achieving students would surely be discouraged by the higher standards.  However, it does make sense that students who do not normally go above and beyond would feel pressed to perform in a required course.  It seems that the higher standards inspired a make-or-break mentality in students who might otherwise be lazy.  I was not surprised that the study confirmed that normally high-achieving students will work hard in any environment.

            To me, an aspiring literature teacher, this study implies that a stricter grading scale should be used in major courses to inspire students to work harder.  However, in a survey course a stricter grading scale might result in low-achieving students giving up because they see a good grade as unattainable.  Also, in a survey course students would be more likely to drop a course with higher standards.  I believe concern that students will drop a course with higher standards can be resolved if expectations of superior performance are clear from the first day.  This gives students who are not required to take the class and do not want to perform the chance to drop the course.  Again, this would not work if a student must take the course.  Basically, I would reserve a stricter grading scale for the environment where it will have a positive effect, upper-division major courses.        

 Work Cited

Elikai, Fara, and Peter W. Schuhmann. “An Examination of the Impact of Grading Policies on

            Students’ Achievement.” Issues in Accounting Education 25.4 (2010): 677-693.

            Professional Development Collection. Web. 2 Feb. 2011.