Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.08 10/3/83; site psuvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!akgua!psuvax!bobgian From: bobgian@psuvax.UUCP (Robert S. Giansiracusa) Newsgroups: net.cse Subject: Re: Grades -- do they help or hurt?? Message-ID: <401@psuvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 2-Jan-84 14:20:22 EST Article-I.D.: psuvax.401 Posted: Mon Jan 2 14:20:22 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 4-Jan-84 02:46:22 EST References: <387@psuvax.UUCP> <3069@gatech.UUCP> Organization: Pennsylvania State Univ. Lines: 97 Thanks for a very interesting posting (..gatech!spaf). I have read the discussion in "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", if fact, one of my students gave a xerox of it to me! Fascinating approach! I may try it next time I teach a large lecture class. Our backgrounds sound very similar: I'm also finishing up a PhD in CS at MIT while working as an instructor at Penn State (my RA funding at MIT ran out and I couldn't afford tuition!). Also expect to finish in next 6 months. Have only taught 4 classes (3 different courses) so far, last two of my own design. This spring I'm teaching another two originals, the one I described in a posting to net.ai and net.cse yesterday. (I described it as one but it is listed as two here, one "theory" section as a grad seminar and one "lab" as an undergrad project class. Purely administrivia.) > Grades are supposed to serve one basic purpose -- indicate mastery of > the material in the course relative to other students and relative to > the "average." That is, a grade of "C" is usually taken to indicate > that someone has mastered the material at the level of an "average" or > satifactory but minimal level. It is not supposed to be a measure of > how hard someone works, unless that is a specific requirement for the > course. I "sort of" agree, but not fully. In fields where most of what one "masters" is obsolete in 5 years, how important is "mastery"? Actually, a better question is "mastery of what?". I feel that grades should reflect a student's capability to deal with future problems in the domain in a mature and intelligent manner. Yes, "mastery" of technical details of the moment helps, but more important is inculcation of an attitude of reverence for learning and the ability to "master" FUTURE information. IE: self-teaching. I firmly believe that NO TEACHER CAN "TEACH" -- ONLY STUDENTS CAN LEARN. You (..gatech!spaf) correctly point out many of the problems students have in expressing what they have learned (poor English [be they native speakers of it or not!!], poor "mathematical maturity", poor interest, exam panic, etc.). For these reasons I try to grade on my subjective assessment of many factors, rating motivation and ability to learn on one's own among the highest. I try to give students AMPLE opportunity to demonstrate these characteristics. Like you, that includes optional projects (of student's own design), different kinds of exams, MUCH personal discussion ("my office hours runneth over"), and so on. The technique I used in my last class (the undergrad AI course also described in a posting about a week ago to net.ai) was to guarantee minimum grades at mid-semester based on exams to that point. Students knew exactly what grade (minimum) they would get, and I offered many options for increasing them. Those satisfied could "rest on their laurels", and some did so. Interesting fact: MOST of the students with guaranteed 'A's at that point continued participating (discussing in class, writing papers, doing projects) very energetically, despite the fact that doing so could have NO effect on their grades! One advantage of this system: I could with a very clear conscience fail about 20% and give 'C's to about 30% (I gave no 'D's at all - I regard it as nothing but a "consolation prize".) They knew their progress and had 6 weeks to act on it -- if they failed to do so, I won't take the blame! Also, my exams were somewhat wierd. (I posted the exams themselves and a commentary about them about a week ago to net.ai.) They were designed to "disarm" exam panic by stimulating interesting discussions rather than to "measure performance DO-OR-DIE". Some liked them and said that was the best part of the course; others hated them AND ME with a passion!! > You also need to worry about consistent grading with respect to other > instructors teaching the same course at different times. Fortunately, that AI course had only one section! > Finally, I don't think it is necessary or possible to motivate the vast > majority of students. The best we can hope to do is increase the > motivation of the best students, and attempt to light a fire under the > students with the potential to benefit from it. Many people go to > college because Mom and Dad want it, because they think they'll make > big bucks from it, because they'll find a spouse there, or any of a > number of other reasons. They are paying tuition to take up space. > Some of them may eventually develop a love of learning, but we, as > instructors, cannot expect to instill such a desire in the hearts of > all of our students. Especially not in the students who are just > taking our course for 3 elective credits and all they want to do is the > minimum to pass. Sad, but oh so true! Especially at ESU (Enormous State U - see Doonesbury). I think the real problem is not grading per se, it is (1) finding and attracting the brightest and best students and getting them to WANT to take our courses, (2) making it worth their while to do so, (3) lighting fires under them, and (4) hoping that we can be good enough entertainers [this takes real work] that even the poorly motivated among our students can at least enjoy the course! -- Bob Giansiracusa (Dept of Computer Science, Penn State Univ, 814-865-9507) Arpa: bobgian%psuvax1.bitnet@Berkeley Bitnet: bobgian@PSUVAX1.BITNET CSnet: bobgian@penn-state.csnet UUCP: allegra!psuvax!bobgian USnail: 333 Whitmore Lab, Penn State Univ, University Park, PA 16802