Re: Grading Participation

Join Teachers.Net

Chatboards

Recent Groups

Classroom Mgmt

MEMBERS

25 Members

+ Join Group

Pinned Posts

ALLAll Teachers

Teachers.Net LIVE CHAT Support group - Tues eve!

Featured Jobs

Full-timeMontessori Teacher

Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

TemporaryTeachers, rural schools

Peace River North School District

Full-timeHead Teacher: 2nd/3rd Grades – Mills College Children’s School

Mills College

Teaching Jobs on Teachers.Net

Featured Job special only $39!

https://teachers.net/jobs

Become a Teachers.Net sponsor!

Classroom Management Chatboard

Grading Participation

by Joel R.

Sep 23, 2013

Hi all, I teach university freshmen ESL and try to stress participation as one of the most important aspects of my class. Students have speaking partners they run each conversation model, reading, and other activity with and get a daily participation score based off of how much they focus on these activities, and then contribute to the class as a whole. I usually have them practice first with their partner, then ask for volunteers to do the same conversation to the class (seated, not up front). Classes have about 30 students and while they practice, I slowly walk around and help them or just listen if they're actually working on the activity.

The grading problem I encounter with a system such as this is that the talkative, outgoing students are constantly raising their hands, volunteering over and over, and garnering plenty of participation tallies while the quiet or shy students, while practicing the activity with their partner, rarely if ever raise their hands and speak in ...See More

Comment

(10)

report post

view previous comments

Michael K. Hi Kate and Joel,

Yes that idea of using chips for conversation participation would work best for middle school and high school students.

The way I have seen this technique adapted for adult learners is by having discussion board posts (part of participation) being a certain percentage of the grade. Professors require a minimum of...See More

Sep 25, 2013

report post

Steve On 9/24/13, Joel R. wrote: > Steve > I get why we must speak a language to learn it, I speak a second language, and I get that speaking the language is a valid goal to be fostered.

But to fully understand your students you're saying the ace students would not participate unless their ace grade was threatened. And saying for the weak...See MoreOn 9/24/13, Joel R. wrote: > Steve > I get why we must speak a language to learn it, I speak a second language, and I get that speaking the language is a valid goal to be fostered.

But to fully understand your students you're saying the ace students would not participate unless their ace grade was threatened. And saying for the weaker students that a participation grade can lift their grade.

With that it seems to me you've answered your own question. Grading as an objective exercise is a bit like the magician striving to convince the audience that it's really magical when he pulls the rabbit of the hat. But we do a fair bit of that in education.

If the reason to grade participation is to keep the ace students on their toes, then tweak if you will their participation grade to do that. If you want the weaker students to have hope, give them hopeful participation grades.

It really can't be both though we'd like it to be. You have a very subjective goal to give participation grades but you're looking for an objective way to subjectively influence student participation.

If you give participation grades as 'influencers'', then 'influence' as the student's need dictates. That's simply logical.

I'd still be somewhat skeptical that students with Cs and certainly Ds on exams can chatter away orally but that they would try to do that in the face of their Cs and Ds would be magical.

> Thanks for your response. Participation is part of the grading to > encourage class involvement, creating a group communicative > atmosphere. In keeping with language as living, breathing subject > that must be practiced rather than just studied, we encourage > students in their little amount of actual class time to speak and > participate. I teach abroad and most students treat English like > math or history and merely study it without ever practicing or > using it, which leads to large percentages of students who can > ace a test but not order food or tell you about their weekend or > handle any other small conversation. > > Grading is certainly based on their mastery of the material. 50% > of the final grade comes from the midterm, final exam and > quizzes. We also have an oral exam, given once diagnostically at > the beginning of the semester and again at the end, worth 10%. > Grading participation encourages the top students who will ace > all the tests to not sleep through class without penalization, > in keeping with our goal of providing an active group > atmosphere. It also encourages the C or D-level students to make > efforts in class, which can be rewarded with valuable points > should they struggle with the exams. In my opinion 10-15% from > participation is good policy, for this situation. > > The university sets the grading protocol but the staff administer > it themselves (no guidelines on how). I can't say exactly what > the other professors do but I guess their scores are more > subjective. Without specific tallies or pulling numbers somehow > from participation, they just hand out their scores based off > what they see and how they feel each student did. Perhaps some > don't score daily but all at once at the end. I think there > should be some objective basis to it though. > > But thank you for the stark reminder that grading personalities > shouldn't have a place in my classroom. > > > > On 9/24/13, Steve wrote: >> On 9/23/13, Joel R. wrote: >> >> I understand the role that personality, age etc. plays in any >> class and participation. But why must you grade >> participation? That seems to be the problem. Grade on >> mastery. You say participation is not a reflection >> necessarily of their mastery anyway. There are many aspects >> of a student's performance that can't be graded or don't lend >> themselves to accurate grading. When you try to grade >> participation it's as if you're grading personality in a way. >> >> Why not sit with each student and speak with each yourself and >> grade their mastery of speaking the language? >> >> Surely your university gives you guidelines on how to derive >> grades or on what grades should be based. What do others in >> your school do - how do they approach this issue?

Sep 25, 2013

report post

Jamie D. Hi Steve - You make some very interesting points about participation points. I tend to see the participation grade more in online classes and it is usually rolled into a discussion forum grade, because there is an objective way to grade the amount of posts a student makes. However, even that has a subjective aspect, because the teacher usually requ...See MoreHi Steve - You make some very interesting points about participation points. I tend to see the participation grade more in online classes and it is usually rolled into a discussion forum grade, because there is an objective way to grade the amount of posts a student makes. However, even that has a subjective aspect, because the teacher usually requires "meaningful" posts. I would think the subjective aspect would be even more apparent in a traditional classroom. It's a bit more complicated than I originally thought... ~Jamie

On 9/25/13, Steve wrote: > On 9/24/13, Joel R. wrote: >> Steve >> I get why we must speak a language to learn it, I speak a second language, and I get > that speaking the language is a valid goal to be fostered. > > But to fully understand your students you're saying the ace students > would not participate unless their ace grade was threatened. And > saying for the weaker students that a participation grade can lift > their grade. > > With that it seems to me you've answered your own question. Grading > as an objective exercise is a bit like the magician striving to > convince the audience that it's really magical when he pulls the > rabbit of the hat. But we do a fair bit of that in education. > > If the reason to grade participation is to keep the ace students on > their toes, then tweak if you will their participation grade to do > that. If you want the weaker students to have hope, give them > hopeful participation grades. > > It really can't be both though we'd like it to be. You have a very > subjective goal to give participation grades but you're looking for > an objective way to subjectively influence student participation. > > If you give participation grades as 'influencers'', then > 'influence' as the student's need dictates. That's simply logical. > > I'd still be somewhat skeptical that students with Cs and certainly > Ds on exams can chatter away orally but that they would try to do > that in the face of their Cs and Ds would be magical. > > >> Thanks for your response. Participation is part of the grading to >> encourage class involvement, creating a group communicative >> atmosphere. In keeping with language as living, breathing subject >> that must be practiced rather than just studied, we encourage >> students in their little amount of actual class time to speak and >> participate. I teach abroad and most students treat English like >> math or history and merely study it without ever practicing or >> using it, which leads to large percentages of students who can >> ace a test but not order food or tell you about their weekend or >> handle any other small conversation. >> >> Grading is certainly based on their mastery of the material. 50% >> of the final grade comes from the midterm, final exam and >> quizzes. We also have an oral exam, given once diagnostically at >> the beginning of the semester and again at the end, worth 10%. >> Grading participation encourages the top students who will ace >> all the tests to not sleep through class without penalization, >> in keeping with our goal of providing an active group >> atmosphere. It also encourages the C or D-level students to make >> efforts in class, which can be rewarded with valuable points >> should they struggle with the exams. In my opinion 10-15% from >> participation is good policy, for this situation. >> >> The university sets the grading protocol but the staff administer >> it themselves (no guidelines on how). I can't say exactly what >> the other professors do but I guess their scores are more >> subjective. Without specific tallies or pulling numbers somehow >> from participation, they just hand out their scores based off >> what they see and how they feel each student did. Perhaps some >> don't score daily but all at once at the end. I think there >> should be some objective basis to it though. >> >> But thank you for the stark reminder that grading personalities >> shouldn't have a place in my classroom. >> >> >> >> On 9/24/13, Steve wrote: >>> On 9/23/13, Joel R. wrote: >>> >>> I understand the role that personality, age etc. plays in any >>> class and participation. But why must you grade >>> participation? That seems to be the problem. Grade on >>> mastery. You say participation is not a reflection >>> necessarily of their mastery anyway. There are many aspects >>> of a student's performance that can't be graded or don't lend >>> themselves to accurate grading. When you try to grade >>> participation it's as if you're grading personality in a way. >>> >>> Why not sit with each student and speak with each yourself and >>> grade their mastery of speaking the language? >>> >>> Surely your university gives you guidelines on how to derive >>> grades or on what grades should be based. What do others in >>> your school do - how do they approach this issue?

Sep 25, 2013

report post

Joel R. Thanks Steve. I feel this discussion has come full circle. Grading participation seems mostly subjective, but in trying to find ways to do so objectively, it gets very murky and difficult, and ends up being rather subjective anyway. You're right about using these grades as "influencers". Again, the only reason we grade participation in the first pl...See MoreThanks Steve. I feel this discussion has come full circle. Grading participation seems mostly subjective, but in trying to find ways to do so objectively, it gets very murky and difficult, and ends up being rather subjective anyway. You're right about using these grades as "influencers". Again, the only reason we grade participation in the first place is encouragement, for all students, regardless of level. And despite your skepticism, I have plenty of students every semester who are at a C or D level but have lots of motivation, almost passion for English, and a strong desire to improve. They sit in front, write down everything I say in class, and try their best in multiple other ways. But come test time they just don't have the chops to score among the best in class. It's nice to let them know that their situation isn't totally hopeless, that all their effort and participation in class isn't meaningless. They won't be getting an A because of it, but it is recognized and rewarded. Without that little bump, I imagine many would be more prone to giving up or resigning themselves to their low grade, rather than actively working to improve it.

On 9/25/13, Steve wrote: > On 9/24/13, Joel R. wrote: >> Steve >> I get why we must speak a language to learn it, I speak a second language, and I get > that speaking the language is a valid goal to be fostered. > > But to fully understand your students you're saying the ace students > would not participate unless their ace grade was threatened. And > saying for the weaker students that a participation grade can lift > their grade. > > With that it seems to me you've answered your own question. Grading > as an objective exercise is a bit like the magician striving to > convince the audience that it's really magical when he pulls the > rabbit of the hat. But we do a fair bit of that in education. > > If the reason to grade participation is to keep the ace students on > their toes, then tweak if you will their participation grade to do > that. If you want the weaker students to have hope, give them > hopeful participation grades. > > It really can't be both though we'd like it to be. You have a very > subjective goal to give participation grades but you're looking for > an objective way to subjectively influence student participation. > > If you give participation grades as 'influencers'', then > 'influence' as the student's need dictates. That's simply logical. > > I'd still be somewhat skeptical that students with Cs and certainly > Ds on exams can chatter away orally but that they would try to do > that in the face of their Cs and Ds would be magical. > > >> Thanks for your response. Participation is part of the grading to >> encourage class involvement, creating a group communicative >> atmosphere. In keeping with language as living, breathing subject >> that must be practiced rather than just studied, we encourage >> students in their little amount of actual class time to speak and >> participate. I teach abroad and most students treat English like >> math or history and merely study it without ever practicing or >> using it, which leads to large percentages of students who can >> ace a test but not order food or tell you about their weekend or >> handle any other small conversation. >> >> Grading is certainly based on their mastery of the material. 50% >> of the final grade comes from the midterm, final exam and >> quizzes. We also have an oral exam, given once diagnostically at >> the beginning of the semester and again at the end, worth 10%. >> Grading participation encourages the top students who will ace >> all the tests to not sleep through class without penalization, >> in keeping with our goal of providing an active group >> atmosphere. It also encourages the C or D-level students to make >> efforts in class, which can be rewarded with valuable points >> should they struggle with the exams. In my opinion 10-15% from >> participation is good policy, for this situation. >> >> The university sets the grading protocol but the staff administer >> it themselves (no guidelines on how). I can't say exactly what >> the other professors do but I guess their scores are more >> subjective. Without specific tallies or pulling numbers somehow >> from participation, they just hand out their scores based off >> what they see and how they feel each student did. Perhaps some >> don't score daily but all at once at the end. I think there >> should be some objective basis to it though. >> >> But thank you for the stark reminder that grading personalities >> shouldn't have a place in my classroom. >>

Sep 26, 2013

report post

Michael K Joel,

You bring up a great point about how grading students' participation can give those kids that need it an extra boost on their grade come test time.

Do you have experience with students who do very well on tests, but show little class participation? If so, how have you handled those situations?

Mike

Sep 26, 2013

report post