|
My previous post was about gradin adn motivation and I
put greater emphasis on grading (now, I think that it was a wrong
emphasis).
Let me remind you: I am not sure what action to take:
(1) to grade students according to a curve-based system - in which normality of
the distribution is of course important and (2) to grade students according to
what we called catalogue system - in which I would give what the students would
take; here normality is not important.
Then here is the problem:
I, as an instructor, want to distinguish (1) poor
performers from high ones, (2) high motivated students from the others, and (3)
to let good and high motivated students move on step further (e.g., from junior
level to sophmore) and make poor performers wait one more year even if there is
no normality in the student sample.
For example, if a student is the worst student in the
class s/he will not pass the lecture, whereas the best student will receive A
regardless of his or her real grade.
I wonder this highly competitive education evironment is
benefical or not.
Although it is my subjective evaluation, I feel that
some poor performers are able to pass the exams if we only use the
catalogue system and there are also mid-performers beliving that "C+ is ok for
passing this lectures so why should I study more".
And I also believe that if we only use catalogue system
then how we distinguish , for example, a "good" student receiving A, A, A, and A
from our exams and another "good" student receiving the same scores but
with some extra work, presentation, or activation in class sessions? How can we
distinguish the best form the better?
Thanks for your comments.
|
