An official website of the United States government
ABSTRACT Specifications grading is a student-centered assessment method that enables flexibility and opportunities for revision. Here, we describe the first known full implementation of specifications grading in an upper-division chemical biology course. Due to the rapid development of relevant knowledge in this discipline, the overarching goal of this class is to prepare students to interpret and communicate about current research. In the past, a conventional points-based assessment method made it challenging to ensure that satisfactory standards for student work were consistently met, particularly for comprehensive written assignments. Specifications grading was chosen because the core tenet requires students to demonstrate minimum learning objectives to achieve a passing grade and complete more content of increased cognitive complexity to achieve higher grades. This strict adherence to determining grades based on demonstrated skills is balanced by opportunities for revision or flexibility in assignment deadlines. These options are made manageable for the instructors through the use of a token economy with a limited number of tokens that students can choose to use when needed. Over the duration of the course, a validated survey on self-efficacy showed slight positive trends, student comprehension and demonstrated skills qualitatively improved, and final grade distributions were not negatively affected. Instructors noticed that discussions with students were more focused on course concepts and feedback, rather than grades, while overall grading time was reduced. Responses to university-administered student feedback surveys revealed some self-reported reduction in anxiety, as well as increased confidence in managing time and course material. Recommendations are provided on how to continue to improve the overall teaching and learning experience for both instructors and students.
more »
« less
Work in Progress: Grading through a Capability Lens
The purpose of this WIP research paper is to briefly consider the basis of higher education’s current grading system and to discuss an implemented grading structure based on a human development framework which was part of a cultural shift within the department. The letter-grade marking system is relatively new compared to the institution of higher education and brings with it a secondary effect of an “A” ranking conveying significant value and meaning to the interpreter. Students (and faculty) bring their own interpretation of what it means to be an ‘A’ student and connect this to their personal identity. The shift to letter-based grades coincided with influx of capital into American universities and an industry need for more research. Providing such letter-based sortings is often a required part of the instructional contract with most university structures. Grading systems at their best may provide helpful developmental feedback to learners and reward valued behaviors, but they are also punitive and contribute to shame and feelings of alienation or un-belonging. Grading itself is a strong voice of the faculty. While a curriculum guides the overall experience of students, grades themselves are the “coin of the realm” in terms of directly conveying students what faculty value. These weightings of various activities and what work is and is not graded tacitly tell students where faculty expect students to spend their time and effort. Who can be an engineer is then restricted to those who show aptitude in predefined outcomes and can successfully navigate the grading structures given to them. We ask if it is possible to grade across a curriculum in a way that increases opportunities for student agency and can convey to students the multi-faceted nature of being an engineer. While technical skills and knowledge are important, they are only one aspect of being an engineer. We introduce an attempted grading structure that includes six factors of engineering development used across each assignment within a first year engineering course. This change informed ongoing efforts to align grading approaches that place value on student agency in student development and informed an educational model based on the Capability Approach.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2022271
- PAR ID:
- 10530509
- Publisher / Repository:
- ASEE PEER
- Date Published:
- ISSN:
- 0190-1052
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- https://peer.asee.org/48493
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Portland, OR
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Prior research on faculty-student interactions in engineering education generally conceptualizes the function of these episodes to be supportive of professional development. In this paper, we examine the experience of professional shame amid faculty-student interactions. More generally, we examine the emotional significance of interactions between faculty and students and how such moments can affect how students cope with the experience of professional shame. Our findings are based on a thematic analysis that followed a broader qualitative mixed-method investigation of how engineering students experience professional shame. Specifically, we analyzed specific episodes of moments where the experience of shame was connected to faculty members within focus group transcripts (n = 10) of engineering students (n = 38) and interview transcripts with engineering students (n = 16). We generated three themes that characterized the experience of professional shame amid faculty-student interactions. First, faculty would engender shame through conveying vague, holistic expectations of what it means to be an engineer. Second, students would cope with the experience of shame by blaming the faculty member for the experience. Finally, some students saw the faculty member as a source of hope while they experienced professional shame. These findings point to the crucial role that faculty play in not only preparing engineering students for professional practice but also for cultivating environments of well-being within engineering programs.more » « less
-
The use of computer-based systems in classrooms has provided teachers with new opportunities in delivering content to students, supplementing instruction, and assessing student knowledge and comprehension. Among the largest benefits of these systems is their ability to provide students with feedback on their work and also report student performance and progress to their teacher. While computer-based systems can automatically assess student answers to a range of question types, a limitation faced by many systems is in regard to open-ended problems. Many systems are either unable to provide support for open-ended problems, relying on the teacher to grade them manually, or avoid such question types entirely. Due to recent advancements in natural language processing methods, the automation of essay grading has made notable strides. However, much of this research has pertained to domains outside of mathematics, where the use of open-ended problems can be used by teachers to assess students' understanding of mathematical concepts beyond what is possible on other types of problems. This research explores the viability and challenges of developing automated graders of open-ended student responses in mathematics. We further explore how the scale of available data impacts model performance. Focusing on content delivered through the ASSISTments online learning platform, we present a set of analyses pertaining to the development and evaluation of models to predict teacher-assigned grades for student open responses.more » « less
-
The use of computer-based systems in classrooms has provided teachers with new opportunities in delivering content to students, supplementing instruction, and assessing student knowledge and comprehension. Among the largest benefits of these systems is their ability to provide students with feedback on their work and also report student performance and progress to their teacher. While computer-based systems can automatically assess student answers to a range of question types, a limitation faced by many systems is in regard to open-ended problems. Many systems are either unable to provide support for open-ended problems, relying on the teacher to grade them manually, or avoid such question types entirely. Due to recent advancements in natural language processing methods, the automation of essay grading has made notable strides. However, much of this research has pertained to domains outside of mathematics, where the use of open-ended problems can be used by teachers to assess students’ understanding of mathematical concepts beyond what is possible on other types of problems. This research explores the viability and challenges of developing automated graders of open-ended student responses in mathematics. We further explore how the scale of available data impacts model performance. Focusing on content delivered through the ASSISTments online learning platform, we present a set of analyses pertaining to the development and evaluation of models to predict teacher-assigned grades for student open responses.more » « less
-
This NSF Grantees poster discusses an early phase Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) project which is designed to address preparing engineering students to address large scale societal problems, the solutions of which integrate multiple disciplinary perspectives. These types of problems are often termed “convergent problems”. The idea of convergence captures how different domains of expertise contribute to solving a problem, but also the value of the network of connections between areas of knowledge that is built in undertaking such activities. While most existing efforts at convergence focus at the graduate and post-graduate levels, this project supports student development of capabilities to address convergent problems in an undergraduate disciplinary-based degree program in electrical and computer engineering. This poster discusses some of the challenges faced in implementing such learning including how to decouple engineering topics from societal concerns in ways that are relevant to undergraduate students yet retain aspects of convergence, negotiations between faculty on ways to balance discipline-specific skills with the breadth required for systemic understanding, and challenges in integrating relevant projects into courses with different faculty and instructional learning goals. One of the features of the project is that it builds on ideas from Communities of Transformation by basing activities on a coherent philosophical model that guides theories of change. The project has adopted Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom or capabilities framework as the organizing philosophy. In this model the freedom for individuals to develop capabilities they value is viewed as both the means and end of development. The overarching goal of the project is then for students to build personalized frameworks based on their value systems which allow them to later address complex, convergent problems. Framework development by individual students is supported in the project through several activities: modifying grading practices to provide detailed feedback on skills that support convergence, eliciting self-narratives from students about their pathways through courses and projects with the goal of developing reflection, and carefully integrating educational software solutions that can reduce some aspects of faculty workload which is hypothesized to enable faculty to focus efforts on integrating convergent projects throughout the curriculum. The poster will present initial results on the interventions to the program including grading, software integration, projects, and narratives. The work presented will also cover an ethnographic study of faculty practices which serves as an early-stage baseline to calibrate longer-term changes.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
