Demystifying Alternative Grading Systems

F. Moosvi, Giulia Toti, E. Baniassad
{"title":"Demystifying Alternative Grading Systems","authors":"F. Moosvi, Giulia Toti, E. Baniassad","doi":"10.1145/3593342.3593358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many instructors want their students to focus on learning instead of grades. However, our systems, structures, and policies are heavily centred around grades and the fallacies of their inherent fairness. In these settings, it is hard to expect students to keep their attention on the material and not get distracted by the frequent input of various grades. Alternatives to traditional grading, such as standards or competency-based grading, specifications-based grading, and ungrading, allow instructors to change the conversation and redirect the focus on learning. In this interactive panel, we will begin with a description of some of the most common alternative grading practices: standards, specifications, competency, contract, portfolio, labour, and ungrading. Then, the panellists will share their experiences on adopting these alternative grading systems in courses with some implementation details. Attendees will have plenty of opportunities to ask questions and panellists will also share their experiences on how we refocused students’ attention on rich, high-quality feedback instead of grades. We will also discuss the challenges and opportunities of these systems, and facilitate a discussion on how we can start working on broader structural changes to recentre higher education on learning, rather than points and grades. The primary goal of this session is to examine different forms of alternative grading practices that inform formative and summative assessments, which in turn impact students’ motivation, self-efficacy and course success.","PeriodicalId":378747,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 25th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 25th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3593342.3593358","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many instructors want their students to focus on learning instead of grades. However, our systems, structures, and policies are heavily centred around grades and the fallacies of their inherent fairness. In these settings, it is hard to expect students to keep their attention on the material and not get distracted by the frequent input of various grades. Alternatives to traditional grading, such as standards or competency-based grading, specifications-based grading, and ungrading, allow instructors to change the conversation and redirect the focus on learning. In this interactive panel, we will begin with a description of some of the most common alternative grading practices: standards, specifications, competency, contract, portfolio, labour, and ungrading. Then, the panellists will share their experiences on adopting these alternative grading systems in courses with some implementation details. Attendees will have plenty of opportunities to ask questions and panellists will also share their experiences on how we refocused students’ attention on rich, high-quality feedback instead of grades. We will also discuss the challenges and opportunities of these systems, and facilitate a discussion on how we can start working on broader structural changes to recentre higher education on learning, rather than points and grades. The primary goal of this session is to examine different forms of alternative grading practices that inform formative and summative assessments, which in turn impact students’ motivation, self-efficacy and course success.
揭秘另类评分系统
许多教师希望他们的学生关注学习而不是成绩。然而,我们的制度、结构和政策都严重地以分数为中心,以及它们固有的公平性的谬误。在这样的环境下,很难期望学生将注意力集中在材料上,而不被各种等级的频繁输入分散注意力。传统评分的替代方案,如基于标准或能力的评分,基于规范的评分和不评分,允许教师改变对话并将重点重新转移到学习上。在这个互动小组中,我们将首先描述一些最常见的可选择的分级实践:标准、规范、能力、合同、投资组合、劳动和不分级。然后,小组成员将分享他们在课程中采用这些替代评分系统的经验,以及一些实施细节。与会者将有很多机会提问,小组成员也将分享他们的经验,说明我们如何将学生的注意力重新集中在丰富、高质量的反馈上,而不是分数上。我们还将讨论这些系统的挑战和机遇,并促进讨论如何开始进行更广泛的结构性改革,使高等教育重新以学习为中心,而不是以分数和成绩为中心。本次会议的主要目标是研究不同形式的替代评分实践,这些评分实践为形成性和总结性评估提供信息,从而影响学生的动机,自我效能感和课程成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信