Jim Clark writes:
>I would be interested in hearing about any empirical
>evidence that non-use of grading schemes produces better or even
>as good learning as the use of grades?
Alfie Kohn has an excellent summary about the empirical evidence in a book
titled "Punished by Rewards : The Trouble With Gold Stars, Incentive Plans,
A'S, Praise, and Other Bribes" (Houghton Mifflin Co; ISBN: 0395710901). One
study I remember in particular was one that compared a group of art projects
produced in a competition with rewards for the best to a second group of
projects produced in a non-competitive environment. A blinded review of both
groups showed a greater average level of creativity in the non-competitive
group.
I also have to share an anecdote about my father-in-law, who was a math
professor at UW-Stevens Point. For one class he gave no grades higher than a
B, and the student who had the highest average filed a grievance. The
grievance failed, thankfully. A successful grievance would have effectively
forced all faculty to grade on a curve.
I'm not in academia anymore, but I think there needs to be more recognition
of the harmful aspects of grading. Grading often encourages destructive
levels of competition and it will usually discourage risk taking. Given that
most of you don't have the option of grading all your courses pass-fail,
perhaps the discussion ought to focus on how to manage the current grading
system to avoid some of the negative consequences.
Steve Simon, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Standard Disclaimer.
STATS - Steve's Attempt to Teach Statistics: http://www.cmh.edu/stats
