Saturday, September 19, 2015

Grading Participation: Early Stage Evolution


I finished Jay Howard’s excellent book earlier this week. His second-to-last chapter, “Making Online Discussions Work” was insightful and echoed much of the good advice from Michelle Miller’s book. The topic of today’s blog is on the final chapter: “To Grade or Not to Grade? And Other Conundrums.” I am still a novice in trying to figure out optimal practices in my different classes. This post traces the evolution in my thinking so far. I recognize that I am still in the early stages – and there is far to go before I reach a robust approach. I’m very glad for the many others who have gone before, and this is an area where science professors have much to learn from our non-science colleagues.

Like many other “old school” science professors, I started with having problem sets and exams count towards a student’s final grade. Problem sets, which can be worked on collaboratively, take up a low percentage. Exams, with individual work only, took the lion’s share of the grade. I did not assign any credit towards participation nor did I take attendance. Students could choose to attend and participate, or not. The exams would determine if they understood the material. This is not to say that I had dry, boring lectures. My students over the years will attest to the fact that the classes are interactive, and I pose lots of questions to students (and I do wait for their answers). I also keep the material interesting in a variety of ways to help as a motivating factor for students to attend class.

In my first year teaching General Chemistry (before online homework systems had made their debut), I was over-zealous. Besides the Final Exam, I had five in-class hour-long exams, and every non-exam week there was a problem set. This was a killer from a grading point of view. The next year I cut down the number of problem sets and exams, but this meant that many students did not keep up with the material through longer stretches. (If you fall behind, it’s a lot of work to catch up.) It was only in my third year that I added frequent low-stakes quizzes – 5 minutes on an index card at the beginning of class. To start, I would give maybe 14 quizzes during the semester and count the top 8 (for 4% of the course grade).

The quizzes turned out to be a boon to keep students motivated towards learning while allowing me to reduce further the number of problem sets and assign ungraded homework. At that point I had not read much of the research literature on learning suggesting that this was a good strategy. Over the years I’ve given more quizzes per semester and had them count for slightly more. In fact, in one of my classes this semester that meets twice a week, I’ll be giving 20-24 quizzes and counting the top 16 for 16% of the course grade. This lowers the grade assignment due to exams. (Homework and problem sets have always hovered in the 10-15% range.)

Then came participation. The way I started assigning participation as a grade was when I got my first class of first-year advisees who were also in my General Chemistry course. The college had various useful “College Skills 101” workshops sprinkled throughout the semester such as study skills, how to choose a major, time management, staying healthy in college, etc. One of my colleagues required all the students in any of his classes to stop by his office at least once for a short chat early in the semester. I decided that this was a good idea and assigned 3% for the students to attend some skills events and stop by my office. Students wrote me one paragraph about their experience attending a particular “workshop” – what they learned, and whether they found it useful or not. (That way I could give feedback to Student Affairs so that they knew what worked well and what didn’t.)

These early efforts at assigning some grade towards participation did not involve any in-class participation towards discussing the course material. It is only in the last several years that I have started assigning a participation grade towards thinking about the course material. I have mainly done two things so far. One has been to incorporate blogging outside of class time for the students to connect course material with their lives outside of my chemistry class. The other is to assign short written assignments in class based on the course material. (I usually provide the prompt before class so students can think ahead, and there is usually some discussion both in small groups and as an entire class on the topic. Then the last 5-10 minutes of class is spent writing.) So far this has not been assigned more than 10% of the course grade.

I’ve tried to keep track of the quality of in-class discussion, roving from one small group to another, cold-calling a range of students (after they’ve had a chance to discuss things with their classmates of course), among other things. I just haven’t quite felt comfortable assigning a grade based on those interactions. It’s hard for me to keep track of them and to ensure equity. This is where the online component is helpful for keeping track of things, not to mention it also levels the playing field for students who may be much more introverted or who feel less comfortable expressing themselves in English if it is not their first language. Thank to Howard’s book, I’m now looking more into student self-graded discussion. This seems an intriguing way to possibly accomplish several goals but I’ll have to think about it a bit more before incorporating it.

At the moment, exams still form the bulk of the students’ grade. I think this is appropriate in some of the standard courses that I teach: General Chemistry and Physical Chemistry. However I can see some variation in other courses that I teach to reduce how much exams count towards the grade. I have much more to learn in any case!

No comments:

Post a Comment