Not quite sure that this follows. In my case, material is sequential and later material is dependent upon grasp of earlier material. I realize that this would not be true in a survey course such as Intro Psych.
Even if material is not hierarchical (on however dimensions), there is still an argument for requiring students to work on one chunk of material and mastering it before moving on to the next. Among other things, this was the first time that some students had ever been required to do more than minimal work; they acquired skills which transferred to other courses. For those curious, my course syllabi are online at: http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~br8520zh/ On Feb 20, 2014, at 1:13 PM, Christopher Green wrote: > Interesting approach, so long as your material is easily organized into > one-dimensional hierarchy of difficulty. If not, then you may be preventing > students from completing unit they could because if other units they cannot > complete that were arbitrarily placed earlier in the sequence. > > Chris > ----- > Christopher D. Green > Department of Psychology > York University > Toronto, ON M6C 1G4 > Canada > > chri...@yorku.ca > >> On Feb 20, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Paul Brandon <pkbra...@hickorytech.net> wrote: >> >> As an alternative way of assigning grades, I used a unit mastery system >> where students retested on a unit until they mastered it, then (and only >> then) proceeded to the next unit. The letter grade required by the system >> was then based on the number of units mastered, rather than a judgement of >> the quality of work done, other than the binary judgement of mastery/no >> mastery. >> In an ideal world, students would receive credits based on the number of >> units mastered, and be billed accordingly. >> >>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 7:54 AM, Christopher Green wrote: >>> >>> First, on the history, I believe that grades of A, B, C, etc. are a >>> descendant of the older 1st class, 2nd class, etc. Second, on lost >>> information, I doubt very much information is lost at all because no >>> teacher can actually reliably distinguish between 100 categories. Five to >>> seven is about right. It is mostly noise that is lost. When you include >>> "pluses" and "minuses" on just As, Bs, and Cs (plus a D and F with no E) >>> that gives you eleven categories, which is too many already. What about >>> numerical, multiple-choice tests? They aren't (and shouldn't) be given in >>> every subject. Third, on redundancy with SATs, even if it were true that >>> the content of SATs overlaps completely with that of school grades, the >>> quality of schools varies far too widely to take school grades entirely at >>> face value (especially in the US, where schools are (insanely) supported by >>> highly variable local property tax bases, rather than by more stable state >>> or federal levels of gov't). SATs allow you to compare apples to apples >>> (even if it is, sadly, a few narrow slices of the apples). >>> >>> I will take this opportunity to propose (again) the abolition of grades. >>> Grades serve no positive purpose other than to communicate to the next >>> level of education how the student did in the last level of education (and >>> they do it poorly, by trying to squeeze and entire year's worth of >>> evaluation into a single character or two, and even that they do >>> unreliably). On the down side, grades divert students' attention from what >>> they actually learned to what grade they got. If there were no grades, then >>> there would be nothing for students to focus on but what is in their heads >>> at the end of the course, not the letter that is sent on to the next >>> potential level of their education (and they might even read our comments >>> on their essay and assignments instead of just flipping to the grade, and >>> throwing the rest out). >>> >>> So, you will ask, how would a university select new students from those who >>> apply if they didn't have grades from high school? The same way they did in >>> the old days -- matriculation exams (e.g., entry exams). It only makes >>> sense that the cost of selecting new students should be borne by the >>> institution selecting them, not by the one "before" them. Indeed SATs and >>> similar tests are, in effect, nationwide standardized matriculation exams. >>> They could be improved, to be sure (what couldn't?), but imagine if, >>> instead of endlessly testing, marking, and then debating grades with >>> students, parents (and ultimately lawyers), you could spend that time >>> discussing aspects of the course material they didn't understand the first >>> time around. >>> >>> Chris >>> ....... >>> Christopher D Green >>> Department of Psychology >>> York University >>> Toronto, ON M6C 1G4 >>> >>> chri...@yorku.ca >>> http://www.yorku.ca/christo >>> >>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 12:46 AM, Mike Wiliams <jmicha5...@aol.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Given the level of education debt in the country, it's obvious that >>>> colleges and Universities are making far more money than test companies. >>>> Has anyone ever calculated how much information is lost by converting a >>>> perfectly good test average into a letter? Did I say letter? We actually >>>> convert scores into letters? Imagine if we converted IQ scores into >>>> letters. Does anyone know the history of using letter grades? The error >>>> in grading as a measurement device contributes to the lower predictive >>>> power of grades. If we scored courses better, I am willing to bet that >>>> they would be completely redundant with SATs etc and standardized testing >>>> would have no unique predictive power. >>>> >>>> Mike Williams >>>> >>>>> On 2/20/14 12:00 AM, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) digest >>>>> wrote: >>>>> Assessment companies and the test prep companies that live symbiotically >>>>> off of them make a great deal of money. The test score is held up and >>>>> apart from the grades as being somehow more fair. So I think they invite >>>>> the scrutiny. >>>>> >>>>> I think any individual grade from the student's middle school or high >>>>> school record might be less useful than an aggregate GPA. The 20-30 >>>>> instructors together make an index with considerable predictive power. >>>>> Not that they shouldn't be held accountable also. But it's unlikely that >>>>> all 20 or so are grading too easy or too hard. And no individual >>>>> instructor has the same financial investment in his or her product than >>>>> the handful of institutions making coin from theirs. >>>>> >>>>> That being said, SES, for both grades and test scores, is a problematic >>>>> variable to tease out from merit/ability to succeed in higher education. >>>>> >>>>> Nancy Melucci >>>>> Long Beach City College >>>>> Long Beach CA >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Mike Wiliams<jmicha5...@aol.com> >>>>> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences >>>>> (TIPS)<tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> >>>>> Sent: Tue, Feb 18, 2014 11:10 pm >>>>> Subject: Re:[tips] SAT and High School grade study >>>>> >>>>> These studies of SAT and grades as predictors or criterion just >>>>> >>>>> highlight how grades are poorly designed as a measurement device. What >>>>> >>>>> is their reliability and validity as measures of performance. Somehow >>>>> >>>>> the college board and SAT makers get the scrutiny that we don't apply to >>>>> >>>>> ourselves as grade makers. The error goes both ways. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mike Williams Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato pkbra...@hickorytech.net --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=34426 or send a blank email to leave-34426-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
