The grading for this course is different from other courses in that you are graded by the “bundle” that you have committed to accomplish for the associated grade. If you fail to complete that bundle, you will move to the next lower bundle where you have completed those responsibilities. That means that if you do not want to complete the Clinical Case Study Project or the Service Delivery Project, you do not have to do it and you will not receive an F for that assignment. The bundle that you complete is up to you, however as the grades increase, so do the responsibilities and your time directed towards achieving that bundle. You will need to decide which bundle and grade that you want to achieve and I will ask you for a decision and commitment by 9/3/14. Please note your class activities, quizzes, and projects will not be judged based on your effort. You are responsible for choosing your grade/bundle for this course and meeting the performance expectations associated with the grade.

CSD 1231: Evaluation and Treatment

Erin Lundblom, PhD, CCC-SLP

COURSE ACHIEVEMENTS and ASSOCIATED GRADES _________________________________________________________________________________________ Bundle 1 (D range) D- Pass 7 or less class activities D Pass 8 to 9 class activities D+ Pass 10 or more class activities __________________________________________________________________________________________ Bundle 2 (C range)

Includes the requirements for Bundle 1 at a D+ level, and Receive 90% or higher on 10 quizzes, and Complete the Test Review and Presentation for the following grade:

C- below expectations C meets expectations C+ exceeds expectations __________________________________________________________________________________________ Bundle 3 (B range)

Includes all of the requirements for Bundle 2 at a C+ level, and Complete the Service Delivery Project for the following grade:

B- below expectations B meets expectations B+ exceeds expectation __________________________________________________________________________________________ Bundle 4 (A range)

Includes all of the requirements for Bundle 3 at a B+ level, and Complete the Clinical Case Study Project for the following grade:

A- below expectations A meets expectations

__________________________________________________________________________________________

The Good…• Motivation [or Graduate School (23% hit rate)?]

– 100% (n=107) selected the A bundle– 95% (n=102) adequately completed the A bundle– “I have mixed feelings about the Bundle System. One on hand it pushed us to complete projects as we

had to earn one level to be able to move onto the next. This is a great motivator.”

• Other good OMET/survey things:• Amount you learned: 3.11• 78.1 % reported amount of work was reasonable for course and credits• 87.5% grading clearly communicated• 74% liked pass/fail grading. (Equal on if want other courses to use it.)• 84% liked tokens for quizzes/activities.

• My Outcomes– I know what learning outcomes were demonstrated/achieved for an A, B, C... – I think…

• They worked harder. Did they learn more?? (20% think so)• They complained about it more. • They REALLY earned their grade. (54% more effort than traditional course; 74% feel they earned their grade.)• They were accountable for their grade/learning. • They demonstrated learning outcomes.• They believe it was REALLY “stressful;” it wasn’t. • More like the real world?

– “The fact that missing 3 weekly assignments can cause a student to receive a D in the class, even if they complete the three large projects and every weekly quiz is just unbelievable.”

The Bad…• Motivation (from OMET):

• “The bundle system allows mediocrity and laziness. While I appreciated not having to do much work after the 2nd week of November, I feel as if I would have been more motivated to actually learn the material if the class was set-up differently.”

• “There was also no motivation to perform to the best of your ability when all you had to do was meet a few requirements. I learned less because of it.”

• MY Outcomes– The grading was time consuming, but it was my fault. – The bundles were a bit unequal, again my fault.– Students want to know exactly what to do (i.e. what the instructor is looking for) but

they LOVE points –bot the qualitative mystery of points and the extrinsic motivator. • “The bundle system made it very clear what the expectations were for achieving the grade we

wanted, however the system encouraged us to do the minimum amount of work possible.”– Deviations from a point based system can be unfathomable to a student. It’s so much

easier for them to argue for points/partial credit then to say, “OH, I messed up. That’s an important learning outcome and I didn’t get it.”

• It seems like a class more about following directions than superior work. Following directions should be something we learned a long time ago. And while I understand the importance, taking 10% off of 100% for not having references versus just getting a 0 makes more sense.”

• “I thought the bundling system promoted a way for students to do the bare minimum amount of work... and it made it so if you did not do well and really failed an assignment you could still get an A in the course alongside people who tried very hard.. I just think it should all be graded.”

The UGLY…or what I didn’t think about…

• Recommendation letters– ~ 50 letters this year. More next year. A bit more

challenging to write now…how can I differentiate performance?

• “It gave no opportunity for you to differentiate yourself from your peers. If everyone gets an A does it really mean anything? I don't think it's fair that people who worked half as hard as me and turned in "passable" work were able to achieve the same grade.”

• OMET results weren’t overly stellar. – The majority of “suggestions” were to change bundles!

• “I would say her major weakness is the way she designed the grading system.”

– Hopeful my chair admires my adventures in teaching and curiosity!

Next time…

• I’m not ditching it!!!– Re-bundle.

• Revise A bundle assignment to span C and B as well.• Students complete more parts of an assignment with other stipulations

rather than different assignments for each bundle to help “equalize” each bundle.

• Revise amount/type of work to help decrease grading woes.

– Add tokens…for more than just 2 missed quizzes.• Example: turn in for revisions, missed classes, late assignments, etc.

– Revise rubrics.

• BUT my burning questions are…How do I tackle the “point mentality”, reward greater effort/performance, and foster intrinsic motivation?

Area Items Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

Iden

tifyi

ng In

form

ation

Test Name Publication Date Edition Acronym Price Publisher Population Purpose Components

All components included. Page numbers included. Adequate detail

Components missing that are available. Page numbers not included. Inadequate detail

Stan

dard

izati

on

Sample Size Age Range Sex Distribution SES Distribution/Parental education Locations Geographic regions Racial/ethnic characteristics Dominant language Subject characteristics

All components included. Page numbers included. Adequate detail

Components missing that are in the manual. Page numbers not included. Inadequate detail

Valid

ity

Construct Content Concurrent Predictive

Applicable components included. Page numbers included Adequate, brief, and clear explanations.

Components missing that are in manual. Page numbers not included Explanations are inadequate, unclear, lengthy, or not in student words.

Relia

bilit

y

Test-retest reliability Internal consistency Parallel-forms validity Interjudge/intrajudge reliability

Applicable components included. Page numbers included Adequate, brief, and clear explanation.

Components missing that are in manual. Page numbers not included Explanations are inadequate, unclear, lengthy, or not in student words.

Scor

ing

Proc

edur

es Administration Time

Administration Description Subtest Descriptions Scores

All components included Page numbers included Adequate, brief, and clear explanation.

Information missing that is included in manual. Page numbers not included Inadequate detail provided for more than 2 items.

Area Items Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

Exceeds expectations

7 > satisfactory

Meets expectations

6 > satisfactory

Below expectations

5 > satisfactory

Does not meet expectations

4 < satisfactory