Transcript
Page 1: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Pedagogy, Technology, & Course Redesign VIII

Vera CherepinskyMACS Department

June 5, 2008

Getting Students to Learn from Their

Mistakes:Self-Reflective

Grading

Page 2: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Outline

Setting Motivation Source Logistics Results Conclusion

Page 3: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Setting & Motivation

Fairfield University Jesuit university in Fairfield, CT Founded in 1942 Offers several Masters degrees (including math) Undergraduate enrollment: about 3200 students

In introductory math courses, students rarely use graded exams to study

Page 4: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Source

Article in Conversations on Jesuit Higher Education, No.27, pp17–20, 2005.

Incorporating Reflection – one of the Ignatian pedagogy principles – into the math classroom.

Intriguing idea: a method of grading requiring students to “review their graded exams, get help on what went wrong and re-submit their corrections.”

After thinking through logistics, I decided to implement this idea in my intro calculus classes (MA122 in Sp’06 and MA125/126/227 in ’06-’07 AY)

Page 5: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Logistics: General Idea

Exams first returned without comments or grades Each problem marked with or X

, if completely correct X, if there is some error in the solution

May be a serious mistake, or something very minor in the correct solution

Students get detailed directions on what to do to “get points back”

They have a week to go over their exams and must resubmit original exam with a set of corrections

Page 6: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Logistics: Corrections Rules

For each problem marked with X, Find all errors made (may be more than one!) For each error

Decide whether it was major or minor and explain why, and Show how to fix it.

On due date, both original exam and corrections are collected from each student and graded together.

Each problem on original is assigned a grade (with partial credit).

For each error correctly identified, classified, and fixed, the student gets back half the points lost on it.

Page 7: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Logistics: Sample Directions

MA126 Exam 2 Corrections: Due Wednesday, 4-25

Marked exams were returned in class on Wednesday. An "X" next to a problem indicates there was some error in the solution. It may be a serious mistake, a question left unanswered, an unjustified claim, or something very minor in the mostly-correct solution, such as a typo in the explanation. (If the only thing wrong was clearly a typo or an incorrect notation, this was indicated with a check-mark with a small slash through it; otherwise, something else is wrong as well.) Note also that there may be more than one error per problem, so check your ENTIRE solution to make sure you found them all. Also, don't be discouraged if you didn't get any of the problems completely right: it may just mean you made a minor error in each one.

CORRECTIONS (on separate sheets of paper -- DO NOT write on the original set of exam solutions!):For each problem marked with an "X", you must 1) find the error(s); and for each error, 2) decide whether it is major or minor (and EXPLAIN WHY); and 3) explain how to fix it (for example, you may do this by writing out a correct solution and indicating where you went wrong).

Your corrections AND the original exams will be collected back on WEDNESDAY, 4-25. BOTH of these will be graded; for each error you correctly identify, classify, and fix, you will get back up to half the points lost due to making it in the first place.

You are welcome to work together, use your books and notes, and come ask me for help if you can't figure out what you did wrong. Note, however, that each of you must hand in INDIVIDUAL corrections to your exam.

Page 8: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Logistics: Prior to Exam

Explain grading method Make very clear: over-relying on “fixing it

later” is a bad strategy Extreme case: originally leaving exam blank

and then solving everything perfectly to hand in as “corrections” earns at most 50% (an ‘F’)

Other extreme: not doing any corrections at all (just returning original) is equivalent to traditional grading

Page 9: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Logistics: Instructor Side

Marking original exam Keep track of how far each student got on each

problem (to distinguish original vs. corrections work)

Grading corrections If all conditions are satisfied, half lost points are

returned Total grade

Show both grades for each problem

Page 10: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Marking Exam (First-Pass)

Page 11: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Grading Sample

Page 12: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Total Grade

Page 13: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Results: Survey Form

Numerical questions 1 (disagree strongly)

to 7 (agree strongly)

Free-form questions Would you use it

again? Y/N/No preference

Page 14: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Results

Timing Measures student perceptions, hence given right after exams + corrections are handed in, but before a grade is assigned

Page 15: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Numerical Data SummaryMA227

Fa’07 (15)

MA126

Sp’07 (22)

MA125

Fa’06 (28)

MA122 E2

Sp’06 (41)

MA122 E1

Sp’06 (36)

Avg

1 (more time) 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.2 6.5 6.4

2 (easy to find) 4.4 4.0 4.1 3.5 3.4 3.8

3 (get it better) 6.3 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.3 5.6

4 (enjoyed) 4.8 4.6 4.7 3.3 3.8 4.1

5 (higher grade) 6.4 6.9 6.2 5.8 5.7 6.1%Y 100 95.5 92.9 73.2 55.6%N 0 0 3.6 2.4 0

%No preference 0 4.5 3.6 22.0 36.1

Page 16: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Free-form Questions: Themes

#6 (what did you like?) – top responses “Can earn back points/improve grade” Next theme varied by class/semester

MA126, MA125, and MA122 E1:

“able to go over work & correct mistakes” MA122 E2: “understand material better”

Quotes “Not only does it give me a chance to get a better grade, it

also ensured that I had a decent grasp of the material” “I like that I had a chance to improve my grade. I also like

that this assignment forced me to understand the material.”

Page 17: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Free-form Questions: Themes (cont’d) #7 (how to improve?) – top responses

MA126 “good as is” “show how much got wrong (how serious?)”

MA125 “good as is” “show / go over areas of common mistakes”

MA122 “show how much got wrong (how serious?)” “good as is” “give a hint on where errors are (esp in multi-part probs)”

Page 18: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Trends & Modifications Made Trends

Students who originally do poorly love this Students who were almost right like this less

Modifications made First, a typo or notation error got a problem an “X” Based on student comments, since then, a correct

solution with a typo gets a “” with a small slash

Page 19: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Conclusion

Experience of using it over the past 4 semesters and student survey data convinced me that “self-reflective grading” benefits student learning helps develop their self-error-correcting skills

Thus, despite the extra time spent on grading, I believe it is an investment well worth its while.

Page 20: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Acknowledgements

Chris Petersen Black (Central Washington University – Lynnwood) Original idea from her article in Conversations

Larry Miners, Economics Dept. and CAE (Fairfield U.) Helped design the survey form Used self-reflective grading in his small upper-

level economics classes

Page 21: Pedagogy, Technology,  & Course Redesign VIII

Questions?

__________________________________

Dr. Vera Cherepinsky

Assistant Professor of Mathematics

Fairfield University

Phone: 203-254-4000 x3089

Email: [email protected]

__________________________________


Recommended