Hi James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [email protected]
>>> <[email protected]> 28-Oct-09 2:02:35 PM >>> I'm not sure I can add much to what Marc has said but there are some really great references all over the web about why grades don't make the assessment grade, including notions concerning issues of inconsistent across courses or sections elements of points for attendance, points for participation, extra credit; subjective grading of papers and presentations and so on. In most cases the grade is a composite of so many factors that it's hard to say just exactly what any one person may have actually "learned". JC: There is lots of evidence that grades provide a very reliable and valid measure of student learning, although I agree it might be difficult to check off what outcome boxes different grades represent (more on that later). The evidence includes such things as: 1. Variation in student gpas. The standard deviation of an average (i.e., gpa here) depends on the correlations between the scores (i.e., grades) that go into the average. If grades included too much noise, everyone would end up with approximately the same gpa, something one does not see. 2. Grades are reliably correlated with a host of variables that one would expect them to correlate with, such as: measures of academic aptitude, study time and skills, attendance at class, .... Although the correlation between aptitude measures and grades are often cited as validating the aptitude measures, they do validate the grades at the same time. 3. On a more subjective note, it is almost always the case that students who truly impress me with their abilities in class, in carrying out thesis research, in conversation, ... have exceptional grades. My concern with an outcomes approach in higher education (something we do not presently face in Canada, at least not at my institution) is that I do not see exactly how many of the important outcomes could be evaluated other than by recreating the classroom experiences and evaluations. How do outcome approaches, for example, evaluate whether students can study material related to some topic, organize and give a clear 50 minute spoken presentation, and write a coherent and correct 15 page paper? How do outcome approaches evaluate whether students can read a bunch of articles on some topic, synthesize the material, and come up with a worthwhile research project? How do outcome approaches evaluate whether students can independently study and learn complex material? How do outcome approaches determine that students have developed the capacity to persist with difficult material and cope effectively with the associated stress? (This last one probably arises because I teach a very stressful honours stats course!) My fear would be that the outcomes approach would lead to an emphasis on narrow, identifiable skills amenable to outcomes evaluation and that more important competencies would be ignored. Take care Jim --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
