FDW

Joint Session onHolistic Grading

LTC Brian J. Lunday05JUL12

FDW

Joint Session onHolistic Grading

LTC Brian J. Lunday05JUL12

FDW

Joint Session onHolistic Grading

COL Alex Heidenberg05JUL12

FDW Common Assessment Mechanisms

• Course-wide– WPRs (Exams)– TEEs (Finals)– Projects– Course-specific topical

exams (FCE, FDE, FIE…)

• Instructor-specific– Quizzes– Homework– Presentations– Class preparation– Subjective grade*

• 10% of instructor points• Think twice before doing this at all.

Are you assessing understanding or rewarding extroversion (or mimicry)?

Slide 4

Graded Event PointsInstructor Points 150FDE 60WPRs (3) 390Project 100CCE 50TEE 250Total 1000

Sample pointallocation (MA104)

FDW

What are the purposes for grading student work?

FDW

What is holistic grading?

Determination of the overall quality of a piece of work or an endeavor by considering various aspects or components of the work without marking or tallying them.

Education.com

What are the advantages and disadvantages of holistic grading

FDW

7

Discussion• What are some advantages to holistic grading?

– Analytic rubrics can be too prescriptive (in either direction)

– Allows time to focus on feedback/comments (quick)

• What are some disadvantages to holistic grading?– Accepts a certain level of imprecision

• What are some caveats…?– Must communicate standards– Calibration still necessary

FDW

8

Accuracy vs. Precision• What is the difference between accuracy and

precision?

• What does this mean with respect to grading?

FDW

FDW

10

Math Department Grading Guidelines

SUBJECTIVE INTERPRETATION LETTER GRADE NUMERICAL GRADE QUALITY POINT

Beyond expectations of the course A+ 4.33

Dominates the material A 4

Mastery A- 3.67

Excellent performance B+ 3.33

Good understanding B 3

Proficient; Aptitude for the subject B- 2.67

Can build upon this foundation C+ 2.33

Passing; Proficient now (short range) C 2

Short-range understanding C- 1.67Marginal performance with some

elementary understanding D 1

Failing; Definitely failed to demonstrate understanding F 0

FDW

11

You still need a rubric…

FDW

12

A rubric

• A scoring guide to evaluate a student’s performance based on established criteria.

• Chocolate Chip Cookie Rubric– Chips– Texture– Color– Taste– Flavor

FDW

13

A rubric

4- DeliciousChip in every bite, chewy, golden brown, rich, creamy, high-fat flavor

3 – Good75% bites have chips, chewy in the middle, but crisp on edges, a little too brown or undercooked

Store bought quality, medium fat content2 – Needs Improvement

50% bites have chips, too crispy or too under cooked, tasteless, low-fat content

1- PoorToo few chips, texture resembles dog biscuit, burned, chalky non-fat contents

FDW

14

A rubric in the making

• Focused holistic grading– Work exceeds standard, meets the required standard, – falls just short of the standard, does not meet the standard

• Analytic holistic grading– Divided by performance area– Correctness, organization, style, substance

• Major , Minor Errors

FDW

15

Problem-specific Holistic RubricMA104 WPR#3, 2012

Description For this problem Grade PointsExceeds course expectations (no mistakes)

Correct answer w/supporting work & correct units of measurement. A+ 30

Dominates the material Minor calculation/unit error. A 28

Good understanding Finds critical point but doesn’t classify it; answers final question correctly. B 25

Passing; proficient now Finds critical point. C 22

Marginal performance Takes first-partial derivatives correctly. D 20

Failing; definitely failed to demonstrate understanding

Struggles with the right concept. High F 18

No concepts correct, despite related work Low F 8

No work of value No value 0

Sample procedure within MA104• For A, B, or C-level work, instructor identifies the mistake(s) for the student• For D or F-level work, instructor also refers the student to the text for a similar problem, such as

“See Example #4, pg. 948.” in order to help the cadet remediate conceptual or procedural gaps.

Caveat• Cadets often solve (or approximate solutions to) problems in unexpected and completely valid ways!

Keep your eyes (and your mind) open!!

FDW

16

Questions?

* Caution: don’t confuse humor with beliefs.

FDWGeneric Holistic Rubric

USAFA Math Department, 2009

5 4 3 2 1

Outstanding (“A”) Good (“B”) Average (“C”) Deficient (“D”) Failing (“F”)

Well-executed, well-communicated, essentially correct

Generally well-executed but may have minor communication flaws or some math errors

Adequately executed but with some non-trivial errors or inconsistent communication

Flawed execution possibly with non-trivial errors or poor communication

Unsatisfactory execution and/or communication with fundamental errors

Well-executed• Applies a strategy that makes

sense for the given question• Applies appropriate

mathematical concepts and processes

• Does not introduce superfluous material

• Technology is used appropriately

• Work is logical and includes a sanity check of the final answer

Well-communicated• Readable: Work stands alone (retains

context) and is neat and professional in appearance

• Organized: Provides a clear logical flow form beginning to end

• Provides sufficient supporting detail and explanation throughout

• Work is free from grammatical errors• Mathematical composition, terminology,

and notation is correct• Results and/or conclusions are clearly

annotated

Essentially Correct• Precision: Performs

mathematical operations correctly and derives the correct results

• Uses an appropriate degree of accuracy

• Draws correct inferences from graphical or numerical data

• Any computational or algebraic errors are trivial and isolated

• Correct units are used

Slide 17