My Evolving Beliefs on Assessment
In the last few months, I have seen friends post about the 4.0s they have earned in their master’s programs. I often catch myself thinking, “I just need to keep it up, and I will get to post my 4.0 at the end, too!” Then I remember I am in an ungraded program, where a 4.0 is earned by staying on top of readings and iterating on my work based upon professor and peer feedback. In theory, I appreciate this approach; I find that as a learner, I am motivated to do well for reasons beyond a shiny star. However, when all is said and done, will I still want to post my 4.0? Probably.
This is the grading dilemma. Michigan State University uses a standard 4.0 grading scale, but my program has found a workaround, allowing learners to receive feedback and continually improve. By identifying areas for improvement, professors ensure students actively engage with their own work. Last semester, for instance, I submitted an assignment for my Teaching and Learning Online course. My professor provided feedback that was critical and, ultimately, spot-on. I had designed a unit plan weak in assessments (how fitting, as I write this for my assessment course!). The professor allowed me to proceed to the next step, despite the clear lack in my work. As I continued with the unit design, that weakness became a greater challenge, ultimately forcing me to rework much of my existing plan. I suspect the professor knew this would happen—it was all part of the teaching and learning process. That feedback cycle and the subsequent shift in my learning will stick with me far longer than any grade.
The professors and students in my master’s program recognize that this ungrading system works. As the great MALXD scholar Will Havill put it, “Grades are good for eggs, not people.” But while my program has found a way to make feedback and iteration effective in our world, I do pause when I declare, “We should throw away grades because it works for MALXD!” What about college admissions? What about medical schools? What about my 4.0 Facebook post? How do we realistically demonstrate what we know without a grade, especially with the rise of generative AI? The grading dilemma persists because what do you mean my lawyer did not pass the Bar exam because the Bar exam is not a thing?
The Reality of Traditional Assessment
In my 6th-grade English Language Arts classroom, I try to utilize standards-based assessments, implementing rubrics that inform students if they have achieved mastery or need improvement. This sounds great in theory: students understand where they are in the learning process. But ultimately, this just ends up being another grade.
Similarly, when I curve an assignment because the highest score was an 80%—and it does not feel right to fail the majority of students—I am still only providing a relatively meaningless grade. As a teacher, a lack of scores above 80% should indicate to me that I need to go back and reteach the material. But where is the time? If all my students are clearly struggling, then I am the one who has done something wrong, right?
I give students their letter grades, and then like clockwork on a Monday, I hear students discussing how their grades have shifted after I have entered the previous week’s assignments. Some will come to my desk, hypothetical tail tucked, asking how they can improve their grade. My responses are often: “Do the missing assignment” or “Retake that quiz.” But what I am really saying is, “You need to learn the material.” However, as much as I beg, plead, and carve out time for students to learn, the grade makes no difference without them understanding: Where is the gap in their understanding?
In my classroom, I currently weight formative assessments at 50% and summative assessments at 50%, attempting to distribute them evenly. Each quarter, near the halfway point, I can look at a student’s primarily formative grades and predict where they will end up, even before a summative test, quiz, or writing assignment. These formative grades provide a helpful diagnostic for where the student is and where they need to get, except the grades often end up just harming many of my students. They become discouraged by a C- and slowly it teeters into D and E territory. I watch as these kids come to my room, defeated, and either begin acting out or falling asleep—anything but actually learning the material, because the grade is all that matters. I know that both the learner and the educator need to be involved in this learning process, but the system just does not seem to support that very well as I struggle to make it through a day with one hundred and ten eleven-year-olds with a million different needs. So, I put my grades in on Friday afternoon and wait for the next Monday grade review.
The Ideal Assessment
The ideal assessment system is one that encourages a more active, constructivist involvement of learning, with summative assessment used moderately and still focused on feedback. Shepard (2000) makes the argument that teachers must understand their intended outcome first and use a systematic approach to the available evidence, such as grading reflective journals and self-evaluations. When designing learning experiences, it is crucial to first ask: What am I trying to ensure my students take away as a result of this instruction? Then, the focus shifts to: How can I have my students reflect on their learning in such a way that I am able to gauge their growth in this area?
The process of learning comes alive through enacting and reflecting, where students assess their own learning and how they have grown. This ideally results in genuine understanding, rather than simply an A at the end of the course. The persistent pull of the 4.0 might remain, but my belief is that true learning happens when assessment it reveals the path forward and not simply where one is.
References
Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.