Just kidding…well, sort of.
After taking another look at the Butler and Nisan (1986) study last week, the question bears asking: Why grade? After all, earning grades on an assignment did not improve subsequent work. Only feedback can do that.
Following closely on the heels of the “why grade” question comes the next one: Who wants these grades?
- Administrators want grades to assess the job performance of educators. They seem to provide an undisclosed means of measuring production. Yet, how much do the amount, array, and accuracy of grades matter?
- Parents want grades to assess the performance of their children. Provided that those scores fall into a relatively narrow window of percentages, adequate delivery can be achieved. Those scoring lower may diverge into discussions of inadequate teacher performance or challenges to the actual abilities of the child.
- Students want grades to make sure that compliance requirements are met and consequences are reduced. There is also an underlying goal that grades should be “good” whether or not the knowledge objective has actually been entirely met.
Orienteering was once a popular outdoor activity which involved navigating to specific locations, then finding tiny buried treasures and sometimes interacting with them by taking something and/or leaving something behind. It represented a journey, the skill to navigate, the observational tools to locate the hidden object, and the creativity to leave meaningful items. Alas, the pervasive availability for GPS has rendered it obsolete, although there are enthusiasts who abjure the high-tech substitute and use the “old school” maps and compasses to enjoy the experience.
Is Grading Obsolete, Too?
Like orienteering and GPS, there are far more accurate methods of automated grading of most of student-submitted work. If feedback is the key to student improvement on subsequent assignments, shouldn’t it be the pathway more teachers take over grades? Of course, in its way, grades can be considered feedback, but they are less constructive than narrative feedback or pointed identification of the locus of errors.
For example, a simple quiz using Google Forms will auto-grade most questions. In addition, educators can save significant time by explaining the pathway to the correct answer and posting it in the feedback comments for each item on the quiz. Granted, such efforts take time. However, taking the time once to save the need for it on 100 instances of student work is ultimately a vast time-saver, multiplied by many years of use.
Another avenue to take is the opportunity to explain both the feedback toward the correct answer AND the exploration of one or two pathways which may have led students to select the wrong answer and why they are not the best choice. This additional feedback method provides even more detail which can provide immediate corrective information for more students.
Errant Pathways
Resources like Khan Academy and NoRedInk provide low-stakes practice and improvement toward performance goals with immediate feedback to students. There are too many others to continue the list. There is value in that low-stakes practice, but there is also a risk — the pursuit of grades.
Frequently, learners are so focused on achieving their goal grade that the circuitous pathway and the methods are almost immaterial to them. Setbacks become frustrating as a barrier to achieving the goal, not a problematic learning pathway. Too many times, students will move from one problem to the next without clearly understanding the reason for the error. Often, although the explanation is clearly provided, learners neglect to read it or digest the information before taking another chance at the answer. Much like repeatedly running into a brick wall, the outcome is never good. While a guess at a random answer may yield a passing score on the lesson, it seldom holds true for the final assessment and certainly is not fruitful for ongoing understanding.
Does this mean that applications such as Khan Academy or NoRedInk are useless? The fault isn’t in the application; it’s in the mindset that a score is the magic pill to cure the ill. Scoring 18/20 may be troublesome because it’s not perfect. Just like the lottery, maybe the next try will be the winner. An 18 of 20 or 90% or A or Excellent bear the same message, but it may not be enough because it lacks perfection or falls short of the 100% goal. Sometimes making a small mistake and seeing it brought to light in feedback is enough to make the point and learn the lesson. However, students under stress to perform to arbitrary numeric standards which vary from one teacher to another, one class to another, or one institution to another don’t see it that way.
What If…?
Drivers don’t see all three colors at once. When red is ahead, drivers stop and wait, taking extra time. When the light is yellow, they remain alert, look carefully, and proceed cautiously. Green means “go ahead.” Isn’t that enough for grading purposes, too? A case can certainly be made for a fourth level to demonstrate the difference between excellence or superior efforts from those which demonstrate that key learning principles have been addressed well enough. As colleges begin to rethink the value of high-stakes testing like ACT and SAT results, are heavily-laden gradebooks also on the chopping block.
Shepherding the “Lost” Sheep
Shepherds operate with neither traffic lights nor scores. They observe, supervise, and safeguard a larger community. Part of their goal is often to move herds from one location to another where they have adequate nourishment and resources for their needs. Teachers are not so different.
As a person of faith, this image may suggest the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18:12-14). The educational tale lifts up the importance of sometimes leaving 99 sheep who are not in trouble to seek one that is missing. It runs counter to logic and economics, but it is the calling of many teachers. An educator’s heart goes out to those who struggle. For the moment, set aside the thoughts of those who choose not to try. Raising the low end of a range is satisfying. It’s not about the numerical value, because that change for one “sheep” does not make much of a dent in the overall average, but it makes a difference to that one. Clearly, students at that position on the list of grades benefit dramatically from that attention. Furthermore, those at the opposite end do not materially suffer because of the efforts to minister to the significant needs of a foundering student in crisis.
These “sheep” are not lost; they merely need more of a shepherd’s diligent time. Equality would say that such dedication of time is unfair. Equity would demand it. Justice, however, would demonstrate a long view. Helping those in need helps the median. However, it takes significant time and effort. These are students who know they are in “red” territory on the learning scale. They need coaching to find strategies to apply to move to the next level. Those thriving in green pastures are safe.
Most assignments, with the help of educational technology or even class and peer support, can provide adequate feedback and assessment information for students to recognize and correct errors. This is the essence of formative learning. In returning to the question at hand, why grade? The answer, at least with formative assessment, is a simple agreement. Applying numeric or letter grades to formative assessment and especially the recording of it in a gradebook is a profound waste of time, which could be better spent helping those who struggle.
Teacher Takeaways
Applying numeric or letter grades to formative assessment, and especially the recording of it in a gradebook, is a profound waste of teacher time, which could be better spent helping those who struggle.
Butler, R., & Nisan, M. (1986). Effects of no feedback, task-related comments, and grades on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 210. Link here
EmpowerED 