De-emphasis on transactional thinking should be our focus.
As a superficial way to minimize the impact of AI, I've moved from 36% of the grade being based on quizzes/tests to 55%. 45 of the 100 points were based on paper-and-pencil quizzes, 10 based on in-class quizzing via TopHat (about a point per class). Assignments were deemphasized to 29 points of the grade, attendance 6 (about a half point per class session), participation 4 and peer evals 6 for the same total of 100 points. They get about 1 or 2 points as a "hall pass" for one missed class, covering quizzing and attendance.
This has helped me conform to the Dean's Office grading guidelines, where we are sternly asked to award a grade of "A" or "A-" to no more than 40% of the students overall.
But perhaps I need to rethink the entire way I grade students to minimize the transactional nature, where students don't see meaning but just a way to gain their sheepskin.
I'm thinking about a similar approach when I teach undergrads next year. Currently, a good portion of the grade comes from a combination of in-class activities and online assignments, which are all very easy. Overcoming transactional thinking is going to be hard though.
One of my favorite undergrad classes as a student was a linear programming class (management science stuff). The professor had a huge bank of questions. He'd lecture and you'd keep taking mini-tests with a single problem on that topic until you passed. You could even take more than one test in a single class sessions. The grade was determined by the number of tests you passed. It was a mastery approach and the grade was a direct result of what you knew.
Loved this column, Craig!
De-emphasis on transactional thinking should be our focus.
As a superficial way to minimize the impact of AI, I've moved from 36% of the grade being based on quizzes/tests to 55%. 45 of the 100 points were based on paper-and-pencil quizzes, 10 based on in-class quizzing via TopHat (about a point per class). Assignments were deemphasized to 29 points of the grade, attendance 6 (about a half point per class session), participation 4 and peer evals 6 for the same total of 100 points. They get about 1 or 2 points as a "hall pass" for one missed class, covering quizzing and attendance.
This has helped me conform to the Dean's Office grading guidelines, where we are sternly asked to award a grade of "A" or "A-" to no more than 40% of the students overall.
But perhaps I need to rethink the entire way I grade students to minimize the transactional nature, where students don't see meaning but just a way to gain their sheepskin.
DG
Thanks!
I'm thinking about a similar approach when I teach undergrads next year. Currently, a good portion of the grade comes from a combination of in-class activities and online assignments, which are all very easy. Overcoming transactional thinking is going to be hard though.
One of my favorite undergrad classes as a student was a linear programming class (management science stuff). The professor had a huge bank of questions. He'd lecture and you'd keep taking mini-tests with a single problem on that topic until you passed. You could even take more than one test in a single class sessions. The grade was determined by the number of tests you passed. It was a mastery approach and the grade was a direct result of what you knew.