A question: Calling all educators!

Grading and testing is very subjective. It does not make any difference what the grading scale is. I can make tests so hard that nobody would get above 50% and I can make them so easy that everyone would pass.

When I design a test I try to make a it where the scores have a standard deviation of close to 10%.

I grade A = 90-100, B = 80-89, C = 70-79 etc.

The one point difference between grades is discretionary. If the student works hard and their attendance is excellent then I tend to move them up. If a student has a grade of 89.4 and has a great attitude and attendance then I will move that person to an A. If that person is late and lazy then I keep that person at a B.

 

If a person claiming to be an educator believes grading and testing are subjective, I would question that person's grading and testing styles.

I teach music. I teach them how to read music, and test them on what I have taught. I grade according to what I have tested. It's objective across the board.

 

Do you teach what you believe is important or what is absolutely important? Do you teach the standard according to Juilliard or according to the state level for second graders? Someone developed the state standards. Do you teach to the standard so they can take and pass a test or do you teach for understanding? Even the test standards are subjective because those standards keep changing.

Ever see two music teachers who test the same? Ever see two music teachers have the same expectations of their students? Ever see two teachers who teach exactly alike? Ever see a student learn better from one teacher than another? Every student and every teacher is different. Like I said earlier, I can design a test that nobody would pass and one that everyone would pass from the same book and lectures. Is that objective or subjective testing and grading?

What is the standard deviation among the tests you give to your students? Are your students a random sampling of the population and results of the the tests they are given produce a perfect bell curve?How do the results of the tests you give compare to the standard deviation and effect size among other students who are the same age in the U.S.?

If grading and testing is so absolute then can you explain why several years ago when a professor did some research among English professors and when the professors graded the same papers the researcher found a range of as much as two grades on the same papers by the same professors?

 

You didn't say teaching was subjective. You said grading and testing are subjective. Big difference.

As for what's important, I'm paid to teach music. So that's what I do.

 

While things may tend to be more objective at low levels they are not at high levels. I would contend that you cannot separate teaching, grading, and testing.

I am sure you have been to college and noticed that what was an A for one teacher was a C for another. Is that objective grading?

There are no standards for college professors in terms of their grading and curriculum. (That is called academic freedom). The only requirement is that they prepare the student for what follows.

While we may like to think we are objective in grading and teaching we are not entirely because we teach and test on what we believe is important. If we test at the top 10% level, our students may know more because they study more and we teach a higher level, but that does not mean any of our tests are objective. They are skewed by what we believe is important.

Even those who write the standardized tests are continually perfecting them to get a bell shaped curve when the general population in schools is tested.

 

Given that most teachers do so, and do so very effectively, I'd disagree with your contention.

No. In college an A is always 90+%, a B is always 80+%, a C is always 70+%, etc. I've never known of an instructor to give an A for 75% earned points.

 

Not exacly. An instructor will lay out what the grading criteria are on a paper. Now, if one instructor has different criteria than another, then yes, you will get different grades. If they have the same criteria, then the grades will likely be the same. The subjectivity there comes into play as far as what the teacher sees in the paper. But that type of subjectivity is similar to an umpire in baseball seeing or not seeing a play. Not completely objective, but not wholely subjective either. This type of grading is completely fair, appropriate, and above board.

 

How old are your students?

 

Jr High, and high school. Why?

 

Intellectual information can be regurgitated easily and yet not digested. To synthesize that information is much different. If a professor tests at the regurgitation level then students will tend to learn at that level. If a professor tests at the synthesis level then students will have to work harder and understand the material better.

True experimental research is not subjective at all. It is done under prescribed conditions and parameters. Qualitative research is much more subject to other influences.

Most research papers at the undergraduate level are what we call library research and often the outcome is subject to the sources the student uses.

 

At that level your teaching and testing is probably at a much more objective level. However, if you were at a much higher level then you would find that there is far more subjectivity involved. I am no musician but those I know who are tell me that a lot of music has to do with interpretation. It sounds like good noises to me but to them it is much more than that.

I went to one of the top schools in the world in my field. As we talked we noticed that what we did was no longer along the lines of just function and purpose as we did when we were learning at a basic fundamental level but aesthetics entered in. Aesthetics is not always objective. Houses can be functional and well constructed but the look may be very subjective. The look often influences what one thinks of the construction. My experience was very different there than in college.

 

Well, I teach music. Unless you're talking advanced music theory, music at high school and music at college isn't much different.

 

I am not sure I would agree with that 100%. If a paper is to be written using APA format there is little subjectivity in that. If the subject is to be covered then I would agree, because to cover a subject is to deal with every book and every discussion, which would be an impossibility.

There are many things I did not understand all that well until I had to teach them and had some interaction with my colleagues.

If one does historical research about World War II and only uses American sources that research will look very different than if he were to use several sources outside of America.

There is a great book every student should read. It is titled, "How to Lie With Statistics."

 

I do not know what circles you fly in, but I have met very few doctoral students in theology who have such a grasp of history and the languages that they are able to interact with the manuscripts and original documents, and then come to a conclusion based on their original research. Most of what I see is interaction with books they have read and then coming to a conclusion.