Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji 08832320309598620
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Student Evaluations of Faculty Grading Methods
Linda E. Holmes & Lois J. Smith
To cite this article: Linda E. Holmes & Lois J. Smith (2003) Student Evaluations of
Faculty Grading Methods, Journal of Education for Business, 78:6, 318-323, DOI:
10.1080/08832320309598620
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832320309598620
Published online: 31 Mar 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 82
View related articles
Citing articles: 11 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 12 January 2016, At: 23:57
Student Evaluations of Faculty
Grading Methods
zyxwv
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
LINDA E. HOLMES
LOIS J. SMITH
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Whitewater, Wisconsin
ABSTRACT. Considerable literature
S
exists Concerning grading, its purposes, its best practices, and its reliability.
In this research, the authors investigated students’ complaints about how
faculty members grade them on both
essay assignments and quantitative
zyxwvutsr
tudents have the opportunity to
rate their instructors at the end of
each term through global measures of
effectiveness, such as measures of
instructor knowledge about his or her
field of study, clarity of course objectives, and effectiveness of the instructor’s delivery of the material. Included
in the typical evaluation are statements
or questions concerning grading. Were
the grades fair? Were examinations and
assignments directly related to reading
materials and class lectures? These
broad questions give faculty members an
idea of student satisfaction with classes,
but they generally do not help instructors
improve their teaching methods because
the ratings are not specific to particular
habits or behaviors. Instructors do not
know what they do well or poorly
according to these measures. In fact, the
average teaching evaluation form is not
designed to help faculty members
improve their teaching or enhance learning in the classroom (Angel0 & Cross,
1993). Having limited guidance from
students, faculty members use their personal experience and history as students
to decide how to handle the grading
process (Unwin, 1990).
As we demonstrate through a literature review, most grading-related articles focus on the methods that faculty
members should use in the classroom,
the areas that should be graded (e.g.,
content, grammar, organization, arithmetic, process), or methods that seem to
problems. The two major problems
cited by students were lack of “fairness in grading” and too little feedback from their instructors. The
authors explain how strategies such as
setting clear assignment objectives
and using matrices and, rubrics would
help to reduce these negative student
comments.
lead to better student performance. In
these articles, the authors discuss the
appropriate use of marginal comments
on essays or rubrics for quantitative
problems; however, they do not ask students what they like or dislike about the
grading methods used by their teachers.
In this study, we sought to investigate
university marketing and accounting
students’ perceptions regarding the
aspects that they found specifically irritating with regard to faculty grading of
essays and quantitative problems.
In this study, student comments
addressed how faculty members graded
their papers, not the specific letter or
percentage grades assigned. We undertook two student surveys, one asking
specifically about essays and another
asking about quantitative problems.
ing a student’s work and assigning a letter grade (Speck & Jones, 1998; Tchudi,
1986). Walvoord and Anderson (1998)
defined grading as an informed judgment made by a professional. Tchudi
(1986) suggested that faculty members
may also “evaluate” students’ effort by
carefully developing assignments,
answering students’ questions, commenting on drafts, and responding to the
completed effort. Following this evaluation process, the instructor gives a grade.
Instructors and students differ in their
perceptions of the meaning of grades.
Walvoord and Anderson (1998) suggested that grading, from the faculty member’s perspective, serves multiple educationally important purposes. Grading
can evaluate the quality of students’
work as well as motivate students and
encourage them to study and become
involved in the course. It organizes the
course and brings closure to content or
skill areas. How students respond to
grades will affect their ability to learn.
Attribution theory describes the emotional side of grades and two possible
groups that students may tend to fall
into: Whereas some students feel that
they have no control over the outcomes
of their work and that nothing they can
do will improve poor grades, others feel
that they can control their grades and
work harder to improve them.
In another categorization approach,
students are either grade oriented or
learning oriented. Grade-oriented stu-
zyxwvutsr
318
zyxwvutsr
zyxwvutsrqpon
zyxwvutsrqp
Journal of Educution for Business
Grading: Definition and Issues
The term “grading” has been defined
as the process of calculating or measur-
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
dents prefer regularly scheduled exams
and would be likely to withdraw from
courses rather than risk low grades.
Alternatively, learning-oriented students enjoy the process of gaining
knowledge and like to discuss concepts
outside of class. They are less concerned with the grades that they receive
than with the knowledge that they gain
(Walvoord & Anderson, 1998).
To further complicate the issue, students are woefully aware of the subjective nature of the grading process. Students know that faculty members can
make mistakes as they assign grades.
The same faculty member may assign
different grades to the same paper at different times. Research indicates low
interfaculty grade consistency on ratings of the same paper. These behaviors
result in low reliability measures for
grading. Grades reflect the biases of
individual instructors (Page, 1994). In
some cases, the assignment itself may
be inappropriate (e.g., it does not follow
course objectives). In that situation,
even if the instructor grades carefully,
the basic assignment is not valid. Grading inconsistency underscores Walvoord
and Anderson’s (1998) statement that
there is no such thing as “absolutely
objective evaluation based on an
immutable standard” (p. 11).
Too often, grading does not tell students what they did well, nor does it
allow them to build on their successes.
Grades can also promote negative competition among students in the class and
may lead to cheating (Squires, 1999).
Eliminating grading, however, is not a
realistic goal for the present. A more
immediate strategy is to do the best possible job of maintaining a positive class
atmosphere for learning and to see that
grades become a tool for motivating students and improving their performance.
ed with those objectives is important.
Allowing students time for questions
and explaining how grades will be
determined are further requirements
(Unwin, 1990). In writing assignments,
sensitivity to linguistic backgrounds and
cultural differences is important. Tchudi
stated that the central question for business faculty members is not “‘Is this
good writing?’ (as measured on some
absolute scale of literary excellence)
but, ‘Does the writing effectively communicate learning in my discipline?”’
(1986, p. 51). Given the many factors to
be considered in grading essays, emphasis on fairness is as important as giving
feedback.
that marginal comments should be
accompanied by closing comments that
give a summative picture of the students’ work. The closing comments
should address strengths and weaknesses. They give an opportunity to reinforce what students did right as well as
to suggest methods to improve. Too
often faculty members try to save time
by providing only negative communication. Rather than making global pronouncements, in these closing comments the instructor should ask
questions or react to the information as
a reader rather than as a professor. Comments might ask, “Is this information
supported by research?” or “Didn’t you
write this idea earlier in your paper?”
Personal comments are appropriate for
difficult and sensitive issues. Showing
pleasure in the students’ effort is important to the student-teacher relationship
(Tchudi, 1986; Walvoord, 1986).
zyxwvutsrqp
zyxwvuts
Fairness
Students should know from the outset
that the grading criteria are the same for
all students. One way to show students
how their grades were calculated is to
develop a grading sheet with criteria and
weights. Walvoord and Anderson (1998)
indicated that this matrix method of grading helps reduce the number of student
questions about why they did not receive
the grades that they were expecting.
Feedback
Another concern for faculty members
is their use of marginal comments and
the form that they should take. Speck
and Jones (1998) referred to the use of
codes, symbols, and checkmarks within
students’ papers as “minimalist grading”
that saves faculty members time but may
not enhance learning. Putting question
marks, exclamation points, or “yes” or
“no” in the margins assumes that students will understand what the teacher is
referencing. Faculty members using
codes and symbols assume that students
actually will look up what the symbols
mean and improve their work in following assignments. These assumptions
may be erroneous. Walvoord (1986)
suggested that teachers who use codes
or symbols should make their associated
definitions easily available. The axiom
of “less is more” seems appropriate to
apply to marginal comments because of
the potential for demoralizing or confusing students.
Good grading practices would imply
Other Considerations
The attitude of the instructor when
communicating with students does
appear to play an important role in how
well students respond to the grades that
they receive. Giving positive comments
along with suggestions for improvement, using language that is respectful,
and giving evidence of the fairness of
the grades are good practices supported
by the literature. Although authors disagree on how much emphasis should be
placed on grammar in grading essays
outside of the discipline of English
composition, students should be able to
communicate clearly to their professional audiences. Because essays and
quantitative problems require different
grading methods, they also lead to different sets of best practices.
zyxwvuts
zyxwvutsrq
Grading Practices: Essays
Researchers agree that some teaching
and grading approaches work better
than others. Showing students basic
respect, listening carefully to them, and
assuming that they do want to learn are
central to successful classroom experiences (Walvoord & Anderson, 1998).
Beginning with a list of objectives and
then moving to an assignment associat-
Grading Practices: Quantitative
Problems
Guidance on grading problems comes
from the mathematics education literature. Most of it deals with high school
mathematics and focuses on scoring partially correct answers and on assessing
students’ understanding. However, this
literature provides little guidance on
assigning points or grades, an issue that
is very important at the college level.
July/August 2003
319
zyxwv
zyx
zyxwvutsr
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Answers to written problems have
objective and subjective components.
The numerical answer, the objective
component, is either correct or incorrect, and an instructor may assign
grades based on it, alone. However, an
instructor may want to examine the student’s work further to determine if some
parts were correct. This partial credit is
the subjective component, which deals
with the student’s success in applying
relevant processes, concepts, and relationships. Assessing the subjective component of written problems requires
judgment. The instructor may ask some
of the following questions:
1. When the student has a choice, are
some approaches to solving a problem
more appropriate than others?
2. When a solution has several steps
that build on each other, how should the
instructor treat arithmetic or conceptual
errors that were made early in the
process and that make the objective
answer incorrect?
3. Most written problems have many
calculations: Should math errors carry
the same weight as conceptual errors?
Although the answers to these questions and their impact on actual grading
are at the discretion of the individual
instructor, the prevailing belief is that
these judgments should be made in
advance and used consistently so that
the assessments are fair and understandable (Hickey, 1999). Two methods of grading partially correct written
problems are partial credit and grading
rubrics.
difficult to explain (Thompson & Senk,
1998, p. 788).
Grading Methods: Scoring Rubrics
Instructors design scoring rubrics to
mitigate grading inconsistency caused
by subjectivity. They are sets of predetermined criteria that indicate the degree
of success that a student demonstrates in
working a written problem (Hickey,
1999; Thompson & Senk, 1998).
Rubrics have demonstrated strong interrater reliability (Senk, 1985). However,
the literature on rubrics provides no
guidance on the assignment of grades.
Two categories of rubrics are holistic
and analytic.
Holistic rubrics. Holistic rubrics are
general success criteria that can be
applied to any written problem (Thompson & Senk, 1998). An instructor predetermines the degree of correctness based
on the percentage of possible mistakes
and the weight of the mistakes (i.e., conceptual vs. math) and sets a cut-off point
that identifies a correct answer. On a
6-0 or 4-0 scale, correct answers
receive higher scores and incorrect
answers receive lower scores. Holistic
rubric scores are consistent within and
among questions so that the instructor
can add the scores to arrive at the total.
They also make grades explainable.
The literature reveals a large body of
knowledge dealing with grading; however, this knowledge generally originates from instructors. In this study, we
solicited input from university marketing and accounting students to investigate their perceptions on grading. We
formulated the following research
question: What factors regarding faculty members’ grading of essays and
quantitative problems specifically irritate students?
Method
Sample
We conducted this study at the College of Business at a regional public
Midwestern university. At the time, total
enrollment at the College was 2,979,
4 1% of these students were female, and
the average age was 22. Students surveyed about essays were juniors taking
the introductory marketing class
required by all business majors. This
marketing class required substantial
marketing strategy essay reports. Students surveyed about written quantitative problems were sophomore and
junior accounting majors taking an
advanced cost accounting class required
of all majors. This accounting class
required students to do written problems for homework and on exams. The
classes were 42.3% female with 96.6%
traditional students.
zyxwvutsrqpo
Analytic rubrics. Used for specific
problems, analytic rubrics are especially useful for grading open-ended questions. To draft an analytic rubric, the
instructor lists all relevant concepts
needed to answer the question and
matches them with all possible
responses. All combinations of concepts and responses are ranked and
assigned scores. Using an analytic
rubric can make grading consistent and
explainable. Analytic rubrics also make
giving feedback easier because the
instructor has already considered all
possible outcomes (Hickey, 1999).
Rubrics given with an assignment can
be used as a checklist, and they may be
used by students to grade their peers’
work. Student comments indicate that
these practices are valuable to their
learning (Petit & Zawojewski, 1997;
Thompson & Senk, 1998).
’
Grading Methods: Partial Credit
To assign partial credit, the instructor
examines the subjective elements and
determines the student’s level of success
in applying them. For example, if the
instructor believes that a 10-point problem is 60% correct, 6 points may be
assigned. The value of partial credit is
that it acknowledges the correct portion
of the answer. In addition, the points
assigned to different problems are
equivalent so that they can be added to
produce the total grade. However, differences among written problems may
lead to inconsistency in grading that
would make the total points assigned
320
Survey and Data Collection
The survey instruments consisted of
one item. For essay questions, we asked
students to complete the following
statement: “It really imtates me when
an instructor grades my papers and. . . .”
For written problems, we asked them to
complete the statement “It really irritates me when an instructor grades my
written problems and. . . .” The administrator explained the purpose of the
research after handing out the surveys.
The students were told that their
responses would be kept anonymous
and that completing the survey was
optional. In addition, to obtain a variety
of responses, the administrator told the
students to think of their entire educational experience, not just the particular
zyxwvut
zyxwvutsr
Journal of Educationfor Business
zyxwvut
zyx
zyxwvuts
zyxwvutsr
zyxwvutsr
class in which the survey was being
given. We distributed 232 surveys on
essay grading, and 217 students completed the statement for a response rate
of 94%. We distributed 53 surveys on
written problems, and all students completed that statement for a response rate
of 100%. However, we discarded three
of the responses because they were too
specific to the class to be generalizable.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Data Analysis
We reviewed the responses for the
surveys and identified general categories for each (i.e., 15 categories for
essay grading and 12 categories for
written problems) plus an “other” category. For each set of responses, two
graduate students took the original comments and placed each comment in one
or more of the categories. In some
cases, comments made multiple points,
so we placed them in two or more categories. We calculated the interrater reliability scores by dividing the number of
times the graduate students made the
same classification by the total number
of responses. Scores were 86.9% for
essays and 84.6% for written problems.
When raters disagreed on the categorization of particular student comments,
we made the final decisions on which
categories best suited the comments.
Results
TABLE 1. Students’ Comments on Gradlng Essays
Frequency
No.
%
Comment
The instructor gave minimal or no feedback. The instructor gave
no explanation for the grade given.
The instructor only gave negative comments or criticism.
The instructor did not tell me how to improve.
The instructor did not explain the points or grading system. The
instructor did not supply grading criteria.
The instructor’s handwriting was not readable.
The instructor’s comments were based on opinions rather than
objective criteria.
The instructor made too many marks on my paper. The comments
were excessive.
The instructor did not read carefully or spend time in grading
my paper.
The instructor did not return papers in a timely manner.
The instructor’s comments were too vague. I could not determine
what the instructor wanted.
Other
Total
ment for subsequent assignments and
(b) students did not understand how
points or grades were determined.
Remarks that instructors’ comments
were not objective were related to this
complaint. Apparently, students perceived that opinions played too great a
role in grading. Indecipherable handwriting was a problem for almost 7% of
students. Contrary to the often-voiced
opinion that instructors did not give
enough guidance in their comments, a
small percentage of students felt that
instructor’s “bled red all over” papers,
or that their comments were excessive.
Timing related to grading and feedback
arose as another issue. Some students
felt that instructors did not spend adequate time in grading their papers, and
some felt a certain arbitrariness in the
grading process. Students also complained that they did not receive their
papers and grades in a timely manner.
The “other” category included, among
others, the following complaints:
90
39
25
36.1
15.7
10.0
25
17
10.0
7
2.8
7
2.8
6
5
2.4
2.0
5
23
2.0
9.2
6.8
249
100
Students ’ Comments on Grading
Written Problems
Of the 12 initial categories, 8 had three
or more comments and the remaining
comments composed the other category,
leaving 9 total groupings for comments.
The results are reported in Table 2.
The data in Table 2 show that the students’ most frequent complaint regarding the grading of written problems was
instructors’ failure to assign partial
credit. More than 23% indicated that
instructors’ all-or-nothing approaches
to grading irritated them. The second
most frequent complaint dealt with
instructors’ not following the students’
steps to identify what they did correctly.
This compliant was related to the first
most frequent complaint, indicating that
students considered receiving credit for
what they did correctly important. This
response may also suggest that students
would appreciate having instructors
spend more time and take more care in
grading their work. The third most frequent complaint related to instructors’
expectation that students use one particular method to solve problems when
there are other acceptable methods. The
fourth most frequent irritation cited
inconsistency in grading and may also
indicate students’ desire that instructors
take more care in grading work. The
fifth, sixth, and seventh most frequent
zyxwvuts
Students’ Comments on Grading
of Essays
Of the 15 initial categories, 10 had
more than five comments and the
remaining comments composed the
other category, leaving 11 total groupings for comments (see Table 1).
The data in Table 1 show that the
most frequent student complaint concerning essay grading was that instructors provided either minimal or no feedback with the grade. Over one third of
students were irritated by this practice.
The second most frequent complaint
was that instructors provided only criticism, when students would have appreciated some positive feedback as well.
Tied for third and fourth in frequency
were the perceptions that (a) instructors
did not give suggestions for improve-
The assignment was not clear from
the start.
The instructor used terms and symbols that I did not understand.
The instructor’s comments were
disrespectful of me as a person.
The grading did not appear consistent. Other students with similar papers
had different grades.
zyx
July/August 2003
321
zyxwvu
zyxwvu
zyxwvutsrq
zyxwvu
Use grading rubrics, grade sheets,
and/or grading matrices.
TABLE 2. Students’ Comments on Grading Accounting Problems
Frequency
Comment
No.
The instructor gives no partial credit.
The instructor does not trace the student’s steps to see what was
done wrong.
The instructor wants students to use a particular procedure when
there are several ways to solve the problem correctly.
The instructor does not explain how to do the problem correctly.
The instructor gave different grades for the same work.
The instructor does not explain why points were taken off.
The instructor takes off too many points for a simple math error.
The instructor takes off too many points when the problem is too
difficult.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Other
Total
complaints each had three responses.
Students indicated that they were irritated when (a) instructors did not explain
why points were taken off, (b) instructors took off too many points for small
math errors, and (c) the problem was too
difficult. The “other” category included
the following complaints:
Points were taken off for mistakes
in homework when students should get
full credit for effort.
Points were taken off when the student got the answer right but did not
show all the work.
The requirements were unclear.
The comments were indecipherable.
The responses indicate that students
were irritated with instructors’ formal or
informal methods of assigning points to
problems that were partially correct.
Many also wanted instructors to provide
more helpful feedback. The data also
suggest that students wanted to receive
credit for the knowledge that they
demonstrated.
Discussion and Strategies
for Improvement
The student comments about factors
in grading that irritated them fall under
two broad categories: lack of fairness
and inadequate feedback. Regarding
fairness, more than half of the comments on written problems indicated
that students were irritated when they
could not understand the instructor’s
assignment of partial credit, when they
322
%
13
23.2
12
21.4
6
5
4
10.7
8.9
7.1
3
3
5.4
5.4
3
7
5.4
12.5
56
100
believed that the partial credit given did
not represent adequately what they
actually knew, and when they received
no partial credit. We obtained similar
comments regarding partial credit and
not understanding how the grade was
determined in the survey regarding
essays. Students were irritated when
grades seemed to be given based on
opinion rather than fact and when they
believed that the instructor was not considering each student’s work separately.
Students in both groups indicated that
they wanted faculty members to take
adequate time for reading students’
work to determine whether they understood the material. These comments
support Walvoord and Anderson (1998)
and Thompson and Senk (1998), who
suggested that students want to understand their grades. This result also
seems to suggest that students may prefer objective grading.
Students also indicated irritation with
what they perceived as too much
emphasis on small arithmetic errors.
This perception is similar to the “grarnmar vs. content” view given by students
regarding essay grades. These comments support Tchudi (1986), who suggested that content should be given
more weight than “literary excellence”
in the grading process. The students’
comments on fairness suggest the following strategies for improvement:
Regarding feedback, students indicated the need to understand what they did
wrong and how they might improve. For
essays, irritations included receiving no
comments, only negative comments, too
many comments, or vague comments,
suggesting that instructors grading
essays could achieve balance by (a)
addressing only major essay content
problems and (b) placing less emphasis
on grammar (Walvoord, 1986). In addition, the comments underscore the value
of pointing out what the student did
right (Tchudi, 1986; Walvoord, 1986).
Other irritations that dealt with more
mechanical aspects of feedback included “not being able to read the instructor’s hand writing” and “not receiving
the graded assignment in a timely manner.’’ Regarding answers to written
problems, students cited complaints
about instructors’ comments that failed
to tell them “where they went wrong” or
to “show them what should have been
done.” The students’ comments suggest
the following strategies for improvement regarding giving feedback:
Give thoughtful, constructive comments.
Watch your penmanship.
Finally, the students’ overall message
seems to suggest a desire for faculty
members to show professionalism and
respect for them as fellow scholars.
Regarding this concern, the following
strategies for improvement seem
appropriate:
Maintain objectivity.
Improve grading skills by attending
assessment workshops.
Conclusion
Faculty members are aware that
grades and grading methods are important to students. For guidance on grading, many faculty members consider
their own experience as students, solicit
advice from colleagues, and scan the
education literature. Much research has
focused on suggestions about what and
how to grade and how to provide meaningful feedback. However, the literature
has provided no systematic investiga-
zyxwvutsrq
zyxwvutsrqp
Journal of Education for Business
Begin with clear objectives in evaluation of each assignment and communicate them to the students.
zyxw
zyxwvutsrq
zyxwvutsr
zyxwvuts
tion that solicits "
guidance on "
grading"
from students. This study fills the gap.
Petit, M., & Zawojewski, J. (1997). Teachers and
students learning together about assessing
problem solving. The Mathematics Teacher,
90(6), 412471.Senk, S. (1985). How well do students write
geometry proofs? Mathematics Teacher, 78(6),
448-456.
Speck, B. W., & Jones, T. R. (1998). Direction in
the grading of writing. In F. Zak & C. Weaver
(Eds.), The theory and practice of grading writing (pp. 17-29). Albany, N Y State University
of New York Press.
Squires, B. (1999). Conventional grading and the
delusions of academe. Education for Health:
Change in Training and Practice, 12(March),
13-78.
Tchudi, S. N. (1986). Teaching writing in the content areas: College level. Washington, DC:
National Education Association.
Thompson, D., & Senk, S. (1998). Using rubrics
in high school mathematics courses. Mathematics Teacher; 91(9), 1 8 6 7 9 3 .
Unwin, T. (1990). 2.1 or not 2.1 ? The assessment
of undergraduate essays. Journal of Geography
in Higher Education, I4(March), 31-39.
Walvoord, B. (1986). Helping students write well
(2nd ed.). New York: Modem Language Association.
Walvoord, B., & Anderson, V. J. (1998). Effective
grading: A tool for learning and assessment.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
zyxwvutsrqpon
zyxwvut
REFERENCES
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Angelo, T. A,, & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom
assessment techniques: A handbook for college
teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hickey, M. (1999). Assessment rubrics for music
composition. Music Educators Journal, 85(4),
2635.
Page, E. €3. (1994). Computer grading of student
prose, using modern concepts and software.
Journal of Experimental Education, 62(Winter), 127-143.
July/Augusr 2003
zy
323
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Student Evaluations of Faculty Grading Methods
Linda E. Holmes & Lois J. Smith
To cite this article: Linda E. Holmes & Lois J. Smith (2003) Student Evaluations of
Faculty Grading Methods, Journal of Education for Business, 78:6, 318-323, DOI:
10.1080/08832320309598620
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832320309598620
Published online: 31 Mar 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 82
View related articles
Citing articles: 11 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 12 January 2016, At: 23:57
Student Evaluations of Faculty
Grading Methods
zyxwv
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
LINDA E. HOLMES
LOIS J. SMITH
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Whitewater, Wisconsin
ABSTRACT. Considerable literature
S
exists Concerning grading, its purposes, its best practices, and its reliability.
In this research, the authors investigated students’ complaints about how
faculty members grade them on both
essay assignments and quantitative
zyxwvutsr
tudents have the opportunity to
rate their instructors at the end of
each term through global measures of
effectiveness, such as measures of
instructor knowledge about his or her
field of study, clarity of course objectives, and effectiveness of the instructor’s delivery of the material. Included
in the typical evaluation are statements
or questions concerning grading. Were
the grades fair? Were examinations and
assignments directly related to reading
materials and class lectures? These
broad questions give faculty members an
idea of student satisfaction with classes,
but they generally do not help instructors
improve their teaching methods because
the ratings are not specific to particular
habits or behaviors. Instructors do not
know what they do well or poorly
according to these measures. In fact, the
average teaching evaluation form is not
designed to help faculty members
improve their teaching or enhance learning in the classroom (Angel0 & Cross,
1993). Having limited guidance from
students, faculty members use their personal experience and history as students
to decide how to handle the grading
process (Unwin, 1990).
As we demonstrate through a literature review, most grading-related articles focus on the methods that faculty
members should use in the classroom,
the areas that should be graded (e.g.,
content, grammar, organization, arithmetic, process), or methods that seem to
problems. The two major problems
cited by students were lack of “fairness in grading” and too little feedback from their instructors. The
authors explain how strategies such as
setting clear assignment objectives
and using matrices and, rubrics would
help to reduce these negative student
comments.
lead to better student performance. In
these articles, the authors discuss the
appropriate use of marginal comments
on essays or rubrics for quantitative
problems; however, they do not ask students what they like or dislike about the
grading methods used by their teachers.
In this study, we sought to investigate
university marketing and accounting
students’ perceptions regarding the
aspects that they found specifically irritating with regard to faculty grading of
essays and quantitative problems.
In this study, student comments
addressed how faculty members graded
their papers, not the specific letter or
percentage grades assigned. We undertook two student surveys, one asking
specifically about essays and another
asking about quantitative problems.
ing a student’s work and assigning a letter grade (Speck & Jones, 1998; Tchudi,
1986). Walvoord and Anderson (1998)
defined grading as an informed judgment made by a professional. Tchudi
(1986) suggested that faculty members
may also “evaluate” students’ effort by
carefully developing assignments,
answering students’ questions, commenting on drafts, and responding to the
completed effort. Following this evaluation process, the instructor gives a grade.
Instructors and students differ in their
perceptions of the meaning of grades.
Walvoord and Anderson (1998) suggested that grading, from the faculty member’s perspective, serves multiple educationally important purposes. Grading
can evaluate the quality of students’
work as well as motivate students and
encourage them to study and become
involved in the course. It organizes the
course and brings closure to content or
skill areas. How students respond to
grades will affect their ability to learn.
Attribution theory describes the emotional side of grades and two possible
groups that students may tend to fall
into: Whereas some students feel that
they have no control over the outcomes
of their work and that nothing they can
do will improve poor grades, others feel
that they can control their grades and
work harder to improve them.
In another categorization approach,
students are either grade oriented or
learning oriented. Grade-oriented stu-
zyxwvutsr
318
zyxwvutsr
zyxwvutsrqpon
zyxwvutsrqp
Journal of Educution for Business
Grading: Definition and Issues
The term “grading” has been defined
as the process of calculating or measur-
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
dents prefer regularly scheduled exams
and would be likely to withdraw from
courses rather than risk low grades.
Alternatively, learning-oriented students enjoy the process of gaining
knowledge and like to discuss concepts
outside of class. They are less concerned with the grades that they receive
than with the knowledge that they gain
(Walvoord & Anderson, 1998).
To further complicate the issue, students are woefully aware of the subjective nature of the grading process. Students know that faculty members can
make mistakes as they assign grades.
The same faculty member may assign
different grades to the same paper at different times. Research indicates low
interfaculty grade consistency on ratings of the same paper. These behaviors
result in low reliability measures for
grading. Grades reflect the biases of
individual instructors (Page, 1994). In
some cases, the assignment itself may
be inappropriate (e.g., it does not follow
course objectives). In that situation,
even if the instructor grades carefully,
the basic assignment is not valid. Grading inconsistency underscores Walvoord
and Anderson’s (1998) statement that
there is no such thing as “absolutely
objective evaluation based on an
immutable standard” (p. 11).
Too often, grading does not tell students what they did well, nor does it
allow them to build on their successes.
Grades can also promote negative competition among students in the class and
may lead to cheating (Squires, 1999).
Eliminating grading, however, is not a
realistic goal for the present. A more
immediate strategy is to do the best possible job of maintaining a positive class
atmosphere for learning and to see that
grades become a tool for motivating students and improving their performance.
ed with those objectives is important.
Allowing students time for questions
and explaining how grades will be
determined are further requirements
(Unwin, 1990). In writing assignments,
sensitivity to linguistic backgrounds and
cultural differences is important. Tchudi
stated that the central question for business faculty members is not “‘Is this
good writing?’ (as measured on some
absolute scale of literary excellence)
but, ‘Does the writing effectively communicate learning in my discipline?”’
(1986, p. 51). Given the many factors to
be considered in grading essays, emphasis on fairness is as important as giving
feedback.
that marginal comments should be
accompanied by closing comments that
give a summative picture of the students’ work. The closing comments
should address strengths and weaknesses. They give an opportunity to reinforce what students did right as well as
to suggest methods to improve. Too
often faculty members try to save time
by providing only negative communication. Rather than making global pronouncements, in these closing comments the instructor should ask
questions or react to the information as
a reader rather than as a professor. Comments might ask, “Is this information
supported by research?” or “Didn’t you
write this idea earlier in your paper?”
Personal comments are appropriate for
difficult and sensitive issues. Showing
pleasure in the students’ effort is important to the student-teacher relationship
(Tchudi, 1986; Walvoord, 1986).
zyxwvutsrqp
zyxwvuts
Fairness
Students should know from the outset
that the grading criteria are the same for
all students. One way to show students
how their grades were calculated is to
develop a grading sheet with criteria and
weights. Walvoord and Anderson (1998)
indicated that this matrix method of grading helps reduce the number of student
questions about why they did not receive
the grades that they were expecting.
Feedback
Another concern for faculty members
is their use of marginal comments and
the form that they should take. Speck
and Jones (1998) referred to the use of
codes, symbols, and checkmarks within
students’ papers as “minimalist grading”
that saves faculty members time but may
not enhance learning. Putting question
marks, exclamation points, or “yes” or
“no” in the margins assumes that students will understand what the teacher is
referencing. Faculty members using
codes and symbols assume that students
actually will look up what the symbols
mean and improve their work in following assignments. These assumptions
may be erroneous. Walvoord (1986)
suggested that teachers who use codes
or symbols should make their associated
definitions easily available. The axiom
of “less is more” seems appropriate to
apply to marginal comments because of
the potential for demoralizing or confusing students.
Good grading practices would imply
Other Considerations
The attitude of the instructor when
communicating with students does
appear to play an important role in how
well students respond to the grades that
they receive. Giving positive comments
along with suggestions for improvement, using language that is respectful,
and giving evidence of the fairness of
the grades are good practices supported
by the literature. Although authors disagree on how much emphasis should be
placed on grammar in grading essays
outside of the discipline of English
composition, students should be able to
communicate clearly to their professional audiences. Because essays and
quantitative problems require different
grading methods, they also lead to different sets of best practices.
zyxwvuts
zyxwvutsrq
Grading Practices: Essays
Researchers agree that some teaching
and grading approaches work better
than others. Showing students basic
respect, listening carefully to them, and
assuming that they do want to learn are
central to successful classroom experiences (Walvoord & Anderson, 1998).
Beginning with a list of objectives and
then moving to an assignment associat-
Grading Practices: Quantitative
Problems
Guidance on grading problems comes
from the mathematics education literature. Most of it deals with high school
mathematics and focuses on scoring partially correct answers and on assessing
students’ understanding. However, this
literature provides little guidance on
assigning points or grades, an issue that
is very important at the college level.
July/August 2003
319
zyxwv
zyx
zyxwvutsr
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Answers to written problems have
objective and subjective components.
The numerical answer, the objective
component, is either correct or incorrect, and an instructor may assign
grades based on it, alone. However, an
instructor may want to examine the student’s work further to determine if some
parts were correct. This partial credit is
the subjective component, which deals
with the student’s success in applying
relevant processes, concepts, and relationships. Assessing the subjective component of written problems requires
judgment. The instructor may ask some
of the following questions:
1. When the student has a choice, are
some approaches to solving a problem
more appropriate than others?
2. When a solution has several steps
that build on each other, how should the
instructor treat arithmetic or conceptual
errors that were made early in the
process and that make the objective
answer incorrect?
3. Most written problems have many
calculations: Should math errors carry
the same weight as conceptual errors?
Although the answers to these questions and their impact on actual grading
are at the discretion of the individual
instructor, the prevailing belief is that
these judgments should be made in
advance and used consistently so that
the assessments are fair and understandable (Hickey, 1999). Two methods of grading partially correct written
problems are partial credit and grading
rubrics.
difficult to explain (Thompson & Senk,
1998, p. 788).
Grading Methods: Scoring Rubrics
Instructors design scoring rubrics to
mitigate grading inconsistency caused
by subjectivity. They are sets of predetermined criteria that indicate the degree
of success that a student demonstrates in
working a written problem (Hickey,
1999; Thompson & Senk, 1998).
Rubrics have demonstrated strong interrater reliability (Senk, 1985). However,
the literature on rubrics provides no
guidance on the assignment of grades.
Two categories of rubrics are holistic
and analytic.
Holistic rubrics. Holistic rubrics are
general success criteria that can be
applied to any written problem (Thompson & Senk, 1998). An instructor predetermines the degree of correctness based
on the percentage of possible mistakes
and the weight of the mistakes (i.e., conceptual vs. math) and sets a cut-off point
that identifies a correct answer. On a
6-0 or 4-0 scale, correct answers
receive higher scores and incorrect
answers receive lower scores. Holistic
rubric scores are consistent within and
among questions so that the instructor
can add the scores to arrive at the total.
They also make grades explainable.
The literature reveals a large body of
knowledge dealing with grading; however, this knowledge generally originates from instructors. In this study, we
solicited input from university marketing and accounting students to investigate their perceptions on grading. We
formulated the following research
question: What factors regarding faculty members’ grading of essays and
quantitative problems specifically irritate students?
Method
Sample
We conducted this study at the College of Business at a regional public
Midwestern university. At the time, total
enrollment at the College was 2,979,
4 1% of these students were female, and
the average age was 22. Students surveyed about essays were juniors taking
the introductory marketing class
required by all business majors. This
marketing class required substantial
marketing strategy essay reports. Students surveyed about written quantitative problems were sophomore and
junior accounting majors taking an
advanced cost accounting class required
of all majors. This accounting class
required students to do written problems for homework and on exams. The
classes were 42.3% female with 96.6%
traditional students.
zyxwvutsrqpo
Analytic rubrics. Used for specific
problems, analytic rubrics are especially useful for grading open-ended questions. To draft an analytic rubric, the
instructor lists all relevant concepts
needed to answer the question and
matches them with all possible
responses. All combinations of concepts and responses are ranked and
assigned scores. Using an analytic
rubric can make grading consistent and
explainable. Analytic rubrics also make
giving feedback easier because the
instructor has already considered all
possible outcomes (Hickey, 1999).
Rubrics given with an assignment can
be used as a checklist, and they may be
used by students to grade their peers’
work. Student comments indicate that
these practices are valuable to their
learning (Petit & Zawojewski, 1997;
Thompson & Senk, 1998).
’
Grading Methods: Partial Credit
To assign partial credit, the instructor
examines the subjective elements and
determines the student’s level of success
in applying them. For example, if the
instructor believes that a 10-point problem is 60% correct, 6 points may be
assigned. The value of partial credit is
that it acknowledges the correct portion
of the answer. In addition, the points
assigned to different problems are
equivalent so that they can be added to
produce the total grade. However, differences among written problems may
lead to inconsistency in grading that
would make the total points assigned
320
Survey and Data Collection
The survey instruments consisted of
one item. For essay questions, we asked
students to complete the following
statement: “It really imtates me when
an instructor grades my papers and. . . .”
For written problems, we asked them to
complete the statement “It really irritates me when an instructor grades my
written problems and. . . .” The administrator explained the purpose of the
research after handing out the surveys.
The students were told that their
responses would be kept anonymous
and that completing the survey was
optional. In addition, to obtain a variety
of responses, the administrator told the
students to think of their entire educational experience, not just the particular
zyxwvut
zyxwvutsr
Journal of Educationfor Business
zyxwvut
zyx
zyxwvuts
zyxwvutsr
zyxwvutsr
class in which the survey was being
given. We distributed 232 surveys on
essay grading, and 217 students completed the statement for a response rate
of 94%. We distributed 53 surveys on
written problems, and all students completed that statement for a response rate
of 100%. However, we discarded three
of the responses because they were too
specific to the class to be generalizable.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Data Analysis
We reviewed the responses for the
surveys and identified general categories for each (i.e., 15 categories for
essay grading and 12 categories for
written problems) plus an “other” category. For each set of responses, two
graduate students took the original comments and placed each comment in one
or more of the categories. In some
cases, comments made multiple points,
so we placed them in two or more categories. We calculated the interrater reliability scores by dividing the number of
times the graduate students made the
same classification by the total number
of responses. Scores were 86.9% for
essays and 84.6% for written problems.
When raters disagreed on the categorization of particular student comments,
we made the final decisions on which
categories best suited the comments.
Results
TABLE 1. Students’ Comments on Gradlng Essays
Frequency
No.
%
Comment
The instructor gave minimal or no feedback. The instructor gave
no explanation for the grade given.
The instructor only gave negative comments or criticism.
The instructor did not tell me how to improve.
The instructor did not explain the points or grading system. The
instructor did not supply grading criteria.
The instructor’s handwriting was not readable.
The instructor’s comments were based on opinions rather than
objective criteria.
The instructor made too many marks on my paper. The comments
were excessive.
The instructor did not read carefully or spend time in grading
my paper.
The instructor did not return papers in a timely manner.
The instructor’s comments were too vague. I could not determine
what the instructor wanted.
Other
Total
ment for subsequent assignments and
(b) students did not understand how
points or grades were determined.
Remarks that instructors’ comments
were not objective were related to this
complaint. Apparently, students perceived that opinions played too great a
role in grading. Indecipherable handwriting was a problem for almost 7% of
students. Contrary to the often-voiced
opinion that instructors did not give
enough guidance in their comments, a
small percentage of students felt that
instructor’s “bled red all over” papers,
or that their comments were excessive.
Timing related to grading and feedback
arose as another issue. Some students
felt that instructors did not spend adequate time in grading their papers, and
some felt a certain arbitrariness in the
grading process. Students also complained that they did not receive their
papers and grades in a timely manner.
The “other” category included, among
others, the following complaints:
90
39
25
36.1
15.7
10.0
25
17
10.0
7
2.8
7
2.8
6
5
2.4
2.0
5
23
2.0
9.2
6.8
249
100
Students ’ Comments on Grading
Written Problems
Of the 12 initial categories, 8 had three
or more comments and the remaining
comments composed the other category,
leaving 9 total groupings for comments.
The results are reported in Table 2.
The data in Table 2 show that the students’ most frequent complaint regarding the grading of written problems was
instructors’ failure to assign partial
credit. More than 23% indicated that
instructors’ all-or-nothing approaches
to grading irritated them. The second
most frequent complaint dealt with
instructors’ not following the students’
steps to identify what they did correctly.
This compliant was related to the first
most frequent complaint, indicating that
students considered receiving credit for
what they did correctly important. This
response may also suggest that students
would appreciate having instructors
spend more time and take more care in
grading their work. The third most frequent complaint related to instructors’
expectation that students use one particular method to solve problems when
there are other acceptable methods. The
fourth most frequent irritation cited
inconsistency in grading and may also
indicate students’ desire that instructors
take more care in grading work. The
fifth, sixth, and seventh most frequent
zyxwvuts
Students’ Comments on Grading
of Essays
Of the 15 initial categories, 10 had
more than five comments and the
remaining comments composed the
other category, leaving 11 total groupings for comments (see Table 1).
The data in Table 1 show that the
most frequent student complaint concerning essay grading was that instructors provided either minimal or no feedback with the grade. Over one third of
students were irritated by this practice.
The second most frequent complaint
was that instructors provided only criticism, when students would have appreciated some positive feedback as well.
Tied for third and fourth in frequency
were the perceptions that (a) instructors
did not give suggestions for improve-
The assignment was not clear from
the start.
The instructor used terms and symbols that I did not understand.
The instructor’s comments were
disrespectful of me as a person.
The grading did not appear consistent. Other students with similar papers
had different grades.
zyx
July/August 2003
321
zyxwvu
zyxwvu
zyxwvutsrq
zyxwvu
Use grading rubrics, grade sheets,
and/or grading matrices.
TABLE 2. Students’ Comments on Grading Accounting Problems
Frequency
Comment
No.
The instructor gives no partial credit.
The instructor does not trace the student’s steps to see what was
done wrong.
The instructor wants students to use a particular procedure when
there are several ways to solve the problem correctly.
The instructor does not explain how to do the problem correctly.
The instructor gave different grades for the same work.
The instructor does not explain why points were taken off.
The instructor takes off too many points for a simple math error.
The instructor takes off too many points when the problem is too
difficult.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Other
Total
complaints each had three responses.
Students indicated that they were irritated when (a) instructors did not explain
why points were taken off, (b) instructors took off too many points for small
math errors, and (c) the problem was too
difficult. The “other” category included
the following complaints:
Points were taken off for mistakes
in homework when students should get
full credit for effort.
Points were taken off when the student got the answer right but did not
show all the work.
The requirements were unclear.
The comments were indecipherable.
The responses indicate that students
were irritated with instructors’ formal or
informal methods of assigning points to
problems that were partially correct.
Many also wanted instructors to provide
more helpful feedback. The data also
suggest that students wanted to receive
credit for the knowledge that they
demonstrated.
Discussion and Strategies
for Improvement
The student comments about factors
in grading that irritated them fall under
two broad categories: lack of fairness
and inadequate feedback. Regarding
fairness, more than half of the comments on written problems indicated
that students were irritated when they
could not understand the instructor’s
assignment of partial credit, when they
322
%
13
23.2
12
21.4
6
5
4
10.7
8.9
7.1
3
3
5.4
5.4
3
7
5.4
12.5
56
100
believed that the partial credit given did
not represent adequately what they
actually knew, and when they received
no partial credit. We obtained similar
comments regarding partial credit and
not understanding how the grade was
determined in the survey regarding
essays. Students were irritated when
grades seemed to be given based on
opinion rather than fact and when they
believed that the instructor was not considering each student’s work separately.
Students in both groups indicated that
they wanted faculty members to take
adequate time for reading students’
work to determine whether they understood the material. These comments
support Walvoord and Anderson (1998)
and Thompson and Senk (1998), who
suggested that students want to understand their grades. This result also
seems to suggest that students may prefer objective grading.
Students also indicated irritation with
what they perceived as too much
emphasis on small arithmetic errors.
This perception is similar to the “grarnmar vs. content” view given by students
regarding essay grades. These comments support Tchudi (1986), who suggested that content should be given
more weight than “literary excellence”
in the grading process. The students’
comments on fairness suggest the following strategies for improvement:
Regarding feedback, students indicated the need to understand what they did
wrong and how they might improve. For
essays, irritations included receiving no
comments, only negative comments, too
many comments, or vague comments,
suggesting that instructors grading
essays could achieve balance by (a)
addressing only major essay content
problems and (b) placing less emphasis
on grammar (Walvoord, 1986). In addition, the comments underscore the value
of pointing out what the student did
right (Tchudi, 1986; Walvoord, 1986).
Other irritations that dealt with more
mechanical aspects of feedback included “not being able to read the instructor’s hand writing” and “not receiving
the graded assignment in a timely manner.’’ Regarding answers to written
problems, students cited complaints
about instructors’ comments that failed
to tell them “where they went wrong” or
to “show them what should have been
done.” The students’ comments suggest
the following strategies for improvement regarding giving feedback:
Give thoughtful, constructive comments.
Watch your penmanship.
Finally, the students’ overall message
seems to suggest a desire for faculty
members to show professionalism and
respect for them as fellow scholars.
Regarding this concern, the following
strategies for improvement seem
appropriate:
Maintain objectivity.
Improve grading skills by attending
assessment workshops.
Conclusion
Faculty members are aware that
grades and grading methods are important to students. For guidance on grading, many faculty members consider
their own experience as students, solicit
advice from colleagues, and scan the
education literature. Much research has
focused on suggestions about what and
how to grade and how to provide meaningful feedback. However, the literature
has provided no systematic investiga-
zyxwvutsrq
zyxwvutsrqp
Journal of Education for Business
Begin with clear objectives in evaluation of each assignment and communicate them to the students.
zyxw
zyxwvutsrq
zyxwvutsr
zyxwvuts
tion that solicits "
guidance on "
grading"
from students. This study fills the gap.
Petit, M., & Zawojewski, J. (1997). Teachers and
students learning together about assessing
problem solving. The Mathematics Teacher,
90(6), 412471.Senk, S. (1985). How well do students write
geometry proofs? Mathematics Teacher, 78(6),
448-456.
Speck, B. W., & Jones, T. R. (1998). Direction in
the grading of writing. In F. Zak & C. Weaver
(Eds.), The theory and practice of grading writing (pp. 17-29). Albany, N Y State University
of New York Press.
Squires, B. (1999). Conventional grading and the
delusions of academe. Education for Health:
Change in Training and Practice, 12(March),
13-78.
Tchudi, S. N. (1986). Teaching writing in the content areas: College level. Washington, DC:
National Education Association.
Thompson, D., & Senk, S. (1998). Using rubrics
in high school mathematics courses. Mathematics Teacher; 91(9), 1 8 6 7 9 3 .
Unwin, T. (1990). 2.1 or not 2.1 ? The assessment
of undergraduate essays. Journal of Geography
in Higher Education, I4(March), 31-39.
Walvoord, B. (1986). Helping students write well
(2nd ed.). New York: Modem Language Association.
Walvoord, B., & Anderson, V. J. (1998). Effective
grading: A tool for learning and assessment.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
zyxwvutsrqpon
zyxwvut
REFERENCES
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:57 12 January 2016
Angelo, T. A,, & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom
assessment techniques: A handbook for college
teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hickey, M. (1999). Assessment rubrics for music
composition. Music Educators Journal, 85(4),
2635.
Page, E. €3. (1994). Computer grading of student
prose, using modern concepts and software.
Journal of Experimental Education, 62(Winter), 127-143.
July/Augusr 2003
zy
323