A thought occurred to me and Jacob earlier when deciding what our final blog posts should look like. We realized that we've had some rather interesting conversations outside of class, and to share them in blog form could prove a fun and academically fruitful affair. So, I will write a post regarding a topic which we disagree on, and in the comments, we will have our discussion, as opposed to writing 'Response to Jacob' or 'Response to Stephen' posts on our individual blogs. So here goes!
When assessing or grading students, class participation should be considered. In a class that is purportedly discussion based, class participation ought to be factored into a final grade. This can be as simple as taking attendance, (though simply being in class is not necessarily a good indicator of discussion participation, you cannot participate if you are not there) or could include noting whether or not students participate actively in discussion. If the goal is to assess the class, and the class is discussion based, it seems incorrect to exclude some consideration for class participation.
Because discussion is the medium through which learning is meant to take place, it does not follow that an assessment of a class ought to include grading participation. Grading ought to represent an assessment of the students' grasp of subject material, not of how many times they speak. The fact that it is a discussion class is rather irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteGrading participation does not account for quality, only quantity. Students will often participate for the sake of the grade and not take care to craft a thoughtful comment or question. As a result, the class as a whole is harmed.
Discussion being the medium does not necessarily exclude it from assessment. Take for example a class where the medium through which a student is learning is a research paper. Should the assessment of the research paper include anything other than subject material? Should the absence of correct grammar or a lack of organization not be taken into account when grading a paper? If so, how does discussion differ from this?
ReplyDeleteAlso, there is a fundamental assumption you're positing with the line "grading participation does not account for quality, only quantity." This assumes then, that a teacher would grade participation in a discussion based on the number of times a student speaks, or raises her hand. It is conceivable that a diligent teacher could note how substantively and frequently a student is engaging in the discussion. I agree that quantity does not suffice, but I think a teacher could perhaps account for quality.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI was not claiming that the medium necessarily excludes it, only that it does not necessarily include it as your first post denoted.
ReplyDeleteYou are right; I was assuming just such as it has never been within my experience that a teacher was able to do so. Nonetheless, an unfair assumption. Therefore, the question before us now is whether or not an instructor ought to grade how frequently and to what substantive degree do students participate?
My answer is still no. Participation is but a necessary condition for academic performance, not a graded aspect thereof. Grading participation would be rewarding minimal responsible adult behavior. Furthermore, there is a danger in patronizing the already active students who need not an external motivator to engage themselves in class.
Do you agree that grading the medium in the case of a research paper is a good choice? If so, why should a research paper be subject to this but not discussion? (Also, to chalk meaningful participation in class discussion up to 'minimal responsible adult behavior is unfair.)
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I agree that rewarding something that someone is already doing is patronizing. Also, there is the student who does not participate in class to consider. Let us for a moment give them the benefit of the doubt and say that they are not simply lazy or unfocused. Let us instead say that they are shy, or intimated to talk in class. Could this not prove a useful method of enticing them? If not making it a necessary part of the grade, then perhaps some extra-credit like consideration. Rewarding a student for overcoming their conversational apprehensions, but not punishing them for not doing so?
Okay then...in three parts.
ReplyDeleteI cannot fathom a scenario in which a research paper is the sole or even primary medium through which learning is supposed to take place. The research paper is a culminating demonstration of the learning that did occur. Hypothetically, if placed into an abysmal chasm in which such a scenario were to arise, then yes, grading the research paper is, of course, prudent. This does not follow that all mediums ought to be graded. The research paper scenario, though unlikely, would be melding the medium and the assessment into one assignment. Typically, they are separate. That is the difference.
Secondly, thoughtful participation within a class, especially a discussion based class as you were kind enough to point out, is, indeed, minimal responsible behavior. You think this is unfair. Why?
Lastly, providing a grade for something a student already wishes not to do may entice them to do so, yes. A 'useful' enticement? No. There are students, as you point out, that do not participate for semi-legitimate to legitimate reasons. The solution is not to provide an external motivation thereby sending the wrong message about proper internal motivation and autonomy. If we want to truly educate and not merely instill facts, such considerations can never be far from our thoughts.
In kind, three responses.
ReplyDeleteBy the research paper being the medium, I mean the researching and writing of a research paper. Take for example a student writing a commonwealth thesis. They have three semesters to research and write a paper defending some novel thesis. Learning takes place in the research, but also learning takes place in the writing of this thesis. Is this not also true of discussions, in which our understanding of the content is changed in the participation of the medium?
Secondly, a student who does nothing to interrupt or hinder the discussion (for example sit and takes notes, without participating), would I think, be exercising minimal responsible adult behavior. However, someone who takes the risk and initiative to further the discussion, to offer themselves up to potential criticism, is doing something more than minimal adult behavior. To call it that devalues significantly something that is a difficult and stressful task for some.
Lastly, I agree that the internal motivation is the superior one. But, when the student is lacking that, is it such a terrible idea for the teacher to buttress an attempt at inculcating internal motivation with some kind of external motivation?
How can a teacher note, especially qualitatively, how well 20 students participate? Would she take notes, or tallies, writing down who spoke and how well they did it? Seems sluggish.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe current undertaking seems to be more, if they could, should they? That being said, it strikes me as possible, but difficult.
ReplyDeleteI love this discussion. I will think about its implications for my own practices, and perhaps have those reflected in the new book.
ReplyDelete3 parts but absent the parallelism of before.
ReplyDelete1+3) Yes, learning can occur during the process of writing a paper, much as it does during discussion. This rather commonsensical point does little though. Your implicit statement is thus: "If learning occurs through it, grade it." This establishes an external motivator for every instance of learning, effectively demotivating any internal sense. This (melding with point 3) is the danger is using external to foment internal. It does not often work and can occasionally prove counter-productive. There are better, stress free manners in which internal motivation can occur.
2) The student you describe is observing minimal respect, not responsibility. Participating increases the probability of getting as much out of the class as possible. It is not merely less responsible to refrain, it is positively irresponsible. Yes, I know that is a subtle distinction, but important.
4) I would like to introduce a variable we have not dealt with: Grade level. While I would not necessarily agree still, your arguments hold much more merit for inculcating internal motivation in younger students. Primary education may be the sole acceptable venue for grading participation. Post-Secondary education, however, is dealing with autonomous adults for whom grading their participation is naught but errant paternalism. The instructor ought to encourage participation, remove obstacles, render it consequence free, and inform of the pedagogical value. The reward for participating is learning more. The punishment for not is failing to learn as much as possible. The decision is theirs; they ought not to be further rewarded or further punished.
I agree Shelby, that it would prove cumbersome, difficult, and sluggish. And Steve, the practicality of grading does factor in to the question of 'Should they?"
ReplyDeleteI never intended to imply it doesn't. Merely to note that your argument seems to have become, "even if they could, they shouldn't".
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAn argument for grades are "errantly paternalistic", would certainly invalidate my entire claim. (And I am inclined to agree with you, at the post secondary level at least.) However, assuming grading at all is something we ought to be doing, there may be merit in grading participation on another ground. By grading both written material and discussion, you are allowing for a greater number of strengths to be assessed.
ReplyDeleteYou were maintaining, however, that grading participation was to grade both frequency and quality. If we were to limit it to quality and if we were to accept that assessing multiple strengths ought to be a goal of grading, then yes, your last point would have merit. Those were two uncertain "ifs" however.
ReplyDeleteI am inclined, then, to offer the following. This is not an agreement, nor something I expect you to readily accept:
Primary: Grade both frequency and quality
Secondary: Grade only quality
Post-Secondary: Grade neither
Thank you.
As we've moved through our discussion the underlying problem that needs solving is the appropriateness of grading. Grading provides, perhaps mistakenly, an external motivation for students, and raises questions about autonomy and parentalism.
ReplyDeleteOught educators to grade students? ~Stephen Kullas and Jacob Wheeler
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete