Talk:Contract grading

Untitled

Help me out in adding to this Ecoamiga 16:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 12 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Phil the Philomath, Angelfrancoo, Randomname45738.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Research and Studies

I believe it would beneficial to the reader if there was a Research and Studies section to show statistics of case studies to promote the concept of why Contract Grading was used. For instance, in 1912-1913, Daniel Starch and Edward Charles Elliott conducted a study on the unreliability of academic grading curriculum. They found that there were no significant increase in learning in a grading system based on absolute standards.[9] To test whether percentage based grading could truly encapsulate the accuracy of a student's performance they had high school teachers from different institutions grade sets of two student papers per subject. In their case study, they had 147 high school English teachers grade two identical English papers. The difference in score for the first paper ranged from 64% to 98% and the second ranged from 50% to 97%. It was made clear to Starch and Elliott that every instructor has their own difference in view in regards to academic performance.JustinS295 (talk) 20:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Additional Subsections

My group and I would like to implement a subsection below "Labor-based contract grading" and "Advantages". We would also like to remove the very first paragraph above on the wikipedia page because we feel it is redundant and a repeat of information. We were thinking of creating a subsection for Hybrid Contract Grading below "Labor-based contract grading" and Impacts on Racism below "Advantages". The Hybrid grading contract exists to create an environment where students have the assurance of receiving a passing grade for fulfilling all the behavioral requirements expected from them while also having the potential of receiving an "A" letter grade on works that go beyond what is expected of them. These topics were not discussed in the original article and can give great insight on what types of grading contracts exist and how it can combat socio-political issues. 2601:644:800:3010:8C59:6E83:F6B8:6BF1 (talk) 22:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note to Instructor

The edits at approximately 10:12 were mine, I was not logged in? Nacre 10 (talk) 03:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Example of Contract Grading

I really feel that the "example" of contract grading is unnecessary. Not only does it emphasize a particular form of contract grading among many various possible forms, but it is not temporally stable. Such examples are likely to change forms as they are improved, and hopefully this style of grading will continue to be used and improved far after this particular implementation is outdated or no longer in use. I propose this section be removed or generalized. Nacre 10 (talk) 03:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Intro paragraph

I know very little about this topic so don't feel qualified myself, but I think the intro paragraph needs more work and clarification. It doesn't give a clear overview of the topic; further reading is required to make sense of it. Amilnerwhite (talk) 04:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I would like to make these additions to the intro

Contract grading is a form of [[1]] which results from cooperation between an instructor and their student(s), and entails a contracted number of assignments of specified quality that correspond to specific letter grades.

These contracts often contain the following two characteristics, there are no finite amount of A’s given in the class. Any student who completes the work that corresponds to a B will receive a B. The second characteristic is instructors and students know exactly what is expected from them to receive a certain letter grade. Contract grading may be contrasted with other grading methods, such as grading on a curve or percentile systems. These curve and percentile systems include the Common Curve, Missouri Curve, and The Gaussian Curve. Grading on these curves creates an expectation that the number of A’s and B’s should correspond to the number of D’s and F’s leading to the majority of students receiving C’s.

In the 2010s Contract Grading has been talked about and promoted as a method to respond to racism within academia and more specifically writing in academia. Asao Inoue, a large contributor to this topic, wrote in his book Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom, “Designing fair and meaningful grading practices is about cultivating with out students an ecology, a place where every student, no matter where they come from or how they speak or write, can have access to the entire range of final course grades possible.” --Angelfrancoo (talk) 17:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

References

Advantages

Proposed changes to Advantages

Contract grading can enable the student to progress at his or her own pace; additionally, contract grading emphasizes learning and reduces grade competition by shifting student and teacher attention away from the end result of an assignment or course and towards the processes or habits that necessarily result in academic and intellectual growth.[7] Systems of this style also encourage a cooperative learning process. By requiring instructor and student to work jointly, emphasis is added on the desires of the student and the goals he or she wishes to accomplish. According to Bucknell University, contract grading "facilitates the development of a partnership learning environment in which students are likely to retain more information, make better use of information, and be more highly motivated to learn than in teacher-directed learning environments." Due to the freedom allowed by the system, time management skills are acquired and exercised. Labor based grading contacts are seen as more fair than conventional grading contracts because course grades are determined by the amount of labor done by students and not influenced by knowledge the students had prior to the course.[3] Phil the Philomath (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Removing racism from the classroom

Labor based grading contacts are seen as more fair than conventional grading contracts because course grades are determined by the amount of labor done by students and not influenced by knowledge the students had prior to the course.[3] Labor based grading contracts avoid racist consequences that are seen in traditional methods of grading. A students grade under the labor based grading contract is solely determined by the work the student puts into the course, not the prior knowledge they have acquired. Basing a students grade on prior knowledge that they may have or have not acquired can be seen as a racist consequence.[3] It is important to note that only Labor based grading contracts avoid racist consequences, since hybrid contracts require a standard of quality they are still unfair at their core.Phil the Philomath (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Disadvantages

Proposed changes to Disadvantages

Contract grading could be viewed as threatening to students who have relied upon structured grading processes. Increased responsibility may cause anxiety for students expecting more common approaches. In addition to concerns for the individual student, contract grading is largely dependent upon implementation by the instructor. An instructor may, through this grading system, cause students to take on greater responsibility for learning and success while simultaneously restricting freedom. Contract grading systems are susceptible to paternalism on the part of the instructor. Whereas the students take on the responsibility of choosing assignments, they may not also actively determine expectations.[8]Phil the Philomath (talk) 22:23, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Implementation

Proposing these changes for implementation.

Students, in addition to choosing the grade they desire and how many assignments they will complete, must also commit themselves to the completion of their contract. Once the student determines the number of works he or she chooses to complete, contracts are then signed and agreed upon. There is a grace period for changing of contracts, but it is ultimately up to the professor to accept or to reject any proposals. The student then has the responsibility to complete and turn in the contracted assignments, with a few deadlines to meet.

First a teacher presents the grading contract to this class then the class if often given time to read over the contract. Next, if the teacher chooses to do so, the teacher will negotiate the terms of the contract. This means that the number of missed or late assignments to achieve a certain grade will be negotiated. There may or may not be a grace period to allow changes in the contract. Ultimately, all final decisions are left to the teacher. At the end of the contract, students will earn the grade that matches the terms of the contract. Labor-based contract grading is also used to combat systemic racism in the classroom by calculating grades based on labor and having less restrictive guidelines in the classroom. Phil the Philomath (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Student reaction

Proposed changes for student reaction

A study published in 1990 received opinions about the contract grading system from 51 undergraduate education majors and 28 graduate students majoring in education at Acadia University in Nova Scotia, Canada. Students at both education levels reacted to the contract grading system in a positive manner. They agreed that the grading system and assignments were made clear from the beginning, that the system was appropriate, and that grades were assigned fairly. When asked to rank the effectiveness and importance of the various aspects of contract grading, students reported that the key elements were the control they felt they had by being able to determine their grades, the clearly stated expectations for performance in the course, criterion referencing of assignments, and the mastery approach to learning.[6]

A study conducted during the 1974-75 school year by James J. Polczynski on 280 students at a Midwest state university found that contract grading raised students instrumentality levels. The study also found that students opinion of their grade and the importance they place on their grade did not change.[3] The largest change that the study found was that students felt a stronger assurance that a particular performance would match the grade they received better under the grading contract system then a traditional grading method. [3] Moreover students also reported that they felt they had more control over their grade in the course which in turn increased their level of motivation to participate in the course.[3] Randomname45738 (talk)Mark

Labor-based contract grading

Proposed changes

In 1993, Peter Elbow problematized traditional writing assessment by suggesting a shift in what to assess. When a teacher uses a letter, number, grid, symbol, or another kind of ranking system to reply to a student's writing assignment, they are evaluating according to a hypothetically unilateral standard of writing. A standard to which writing is measured, however, is subjective. In his article published in the journal College English, Elbow suggests that writing assessment be based on effort rather than on a subjective evaluation aligned with a standard.[3] Asao Inoue has contributed to the literature on this topic, especially in the context of the writing classroom. He emphasizes a version of contract grading called labor-based contract grading as the practice of antiracist writing assessment.[4][5] This form of grading is connected to the effort a student puts forth rather than a "standard" form of writing.[4] Phil the Philomath (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hybrid Grading Contract

There is a second form of grading contracts that is known as Hybrid Grading Contracts. Hybrid Grading Contracts combine elements of Labor-Based contracts with traditional grading contracts. Hybrid Grading Contracts assess both labor and quality of a student's work in determining a student's grade.

Student reaction

Proposed changes

A study published in 1990 received opinions about the contract grading system from 51 undergraduate education majors and 28 graduate students majoring in education at Acadia University in Nova Scotia, Canada. Students at both education levels reacted to the contract grading system in a positive manner. They agreed that the grading system and assignments were made clear from the beginning, that the system was appropriate, and that grades were assigned fairly. When asked to rank the effectiveness and importance of the various aspects of contract grading, students reported that the key elements were the control they felt they had by being able to determine their grades, the clearly stated expectations for performance in the course, criterion referencing of assignments, and the mastery approach to learning.[6]

A study conducted during the 1974-75 school year by James J. Polczynski on 280 students at a Midwest state university found that contract grading raised students' instrumentality levels.  The study also found that students' opinions of their grades and the importance they place on their grades did not change.  The largest change that the study found was that students felt a stronger assurance that a particular performance would match the grade they received better under the grading contract system than a traditional grading method.  Moreover, students also reported that they felt they had more control over their grades in the course which in turn increased their level of motivation to participate in the course. Phil the Philomath (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Questions

Is it permissible to post a table figure as an example for grading contracts and cite the source or does this fall under the category of Wikimedia? Phil the Philomath (talk) 19:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)