One of the comments that constantly comes up in the TAO evaluations is “I wish we’d covered more on grading.” Almost every instructor has to do it, and it can be challenging, so Matt, Ann, and I devoted our fifth workshop to grading, evaluating, and giving feedback.
Our workshop goals were:
1. Troubleshoot and brainstorm practical grading tools
2. Identify different assessment types and their strengths and weaknesses
3. Learn the purpose of a rubric
4. Use written feedback as a teaching tool
5. Introduce the use of non-traditional feedback
To begin the workshop, we wanted to hear our participants’ concerns about grading, especially logistical and practical ones. There was a wide range of concerns, which spanned from allowing our moods to dictate grading harshness, to evaluating student work in subjective topics, to students lacking reaction to the instructor’s feedback. To take advantage of our collective experiences, we asked other participants to suggest solutions. People had great ideas and at least one other participant had run into every single concern. In regard to mood affecting grading, someone suggested grading all of one question at a time and shuffling papers after each question. If you have any grading concerns or suggestions and would like some feedback, feel free to leave a comment below.
Once discussing concerns, we thought it would be useful to identify what exactly it is we’re grading. As a group, participants brainstormed different assessment types (multiple choice exam, oral presentation, participation credit, essays, etc). Each assessment type lends itself to certain types of student thinking, and we spent time recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of each type of assessment. For example, a take-home exam provides an opportunity for students to spend more time on it, which can promote research skills that wouldn’t be possible in an in-class exam. However, take-home exams also introduce opportunities for academic dishonesty.
Multiple choice exams might be easy to grade, but they are limiting in the types of questions one can ask students. The purpose behind this exercise was to have participants consider what certain types of assessments can and can’t accomplish and to encourage instructors to use a variety of assessment types in their classrooms.
Almost everyone has either seen or used a rubric, and rubrics can be powerful tools in teaching. In the next part of the workshop, participants identified some purposes of a rubric (it helps break down the components of an assignment; it promotes grading consistency; it serves as a way for instructors to communicate their expectations to students). Matt led a thought-provoking exercise in which participants were asked to consider a sample rubric. They underlined parts of the rubric that were helpful and circled parts that weren’t, and then compared with a partner. Participants had strong reactions to the sample rubrics and pointed out parts that did and didn’t work well, and why. Hopefully this exercise encouraged participants to consider their own use of rubrics and how to make them as effective as possible.
We then took the time to think about written feedback (as opposed to letter or numerical grades without comment). Participants agreed that written feedback is not only useful for the student’s understanding of why they were given a certain grade, it’s also useful for the instructor as reference if a student asks to discuss the feedback they were given. Ann introduced the “feedback sandwich,” a guide that reminds instructors to balance constructive feedback on poor or inappropriate answers with honest praise. Participants then practiced giving written feedback on sample student work and compared their own feedback to the qualities they had identified earlier.
Last, the group explored the use of non-traditional feedback. It can be difficult, if not impossible, for instructors to give quality feedback to every student in a large class, and non-traditional techniques like peer-review can help mitigate that issue. Peer-review is also valuable because it can serve as a teaching tool: in evaluating one another, students can gain skills in revision and critiquing their own work more carefully.
As leaders, we hoped our workshop spanned issues in grading and evaluating from the basic to the advanced. As instructors we are almost certainly required to grade student work—why not use it as a teaching tool too?
No comments:
Post a Comment