I like this play-by-play grading reflection, David! It would be helpful to know how many students are in your Calculus 2 class, to give context to some of the strategies you employ and how feasible they may be for others. Thanks!
Whoops, all that context and I forgot to include the class size! I've updated it, but: Calc 2 is typically 20-30 students. We have low caps at GVSU math.
I’m drawn to your use of the final exam to address retention (I’m sure you and Robert have both discussed this before). Alas, we do not have +/- grades, so I can’t use it in that same way. Do you have any thoughts on how you might incorporate your final exam into the course grade if +/- grades were not an option?
Hi Jeffrey, that's a tricky situation. Of course, one solution (but probably not a great one) would be to make the final exam raise or lower students by a whole letter grade (or lead to no change -- I have that option too). But that's probably too extreme and makes the exam too high stakes.
I know that some instructors have a small list of core targets that students *must* complete (at some point, not necessarily the final) in order to pass the class. In this case, the final isn't a required reassessment, but rather one last chance to show that you can pass the class for any core targets you haven't passed yet.
Here's another possibility: I usually have an Engagement Points category too, that I use for things like completing pre-class prep, attendance, auto-graded online homework, etc. -- stuff that's just checked for being done. I could imagine that both Engagement and the Core final exam have a "vote" on the final grade. For example:
Both engagement & core final are high = increase by 1 letter grade
Both engagement & core final are low = decrease by 1 letter grade
Engagement & final point in opposite directions = no change
At least that means that there are multiple factors leading to the big grade change.
Still not great, but maybe that gives you some ideas to start with?
I think it's great that you are stating the learning target and then posing and addressing your students' question of "But what does that target really mean, in a practical on-the-exam kind of way?" Making explicit connections between LOs/targets and sample questions is far too rare in biology (my field) and perhaps STEM as a whole, and doing so is the essence of the Test Question Template (TQT) system. I also note approvingly that your target explanation says, "You will be given X and you will need to produce Y." I find that so useful that I write my LOs in that format ("given X, do Y" -- as discussed in my guest post here last November).
I like this play-by-play grading reflection, David! It would be helpful to know how many students are in your Calculus 2 class, to give context to some of the strategies you employ and how feasible they may be for others. Thanks!
Whoops, all that context and I forgot to include the class size! I've updated it, but: Calc 2 is typically 20-30 students. We have low caps at GVSU math.
I’m drawn to your use of the final exam to address retention (I’m sure you and Robert have both discussed this before). Alas, we do not have +/- grades, so I can’t use it in that same way. Do you have any thoughts on how you might incorporate your final exam into the course grade if +/- grades were not an option?
Hi Jeffrey, that's a tricky situation. Of course, one solution (but probably not a great one) would be to make the final exam raise or lower students by a whole letter grade (or lead to no change -- I have that option too). But that's probably too extreme and makes the exam too high stakes.
I know that some instructors have a small list of core targets that students *must* complete (at some point, not necessarily the final) in order to pass the class. In this case, the final isn't a required reassessment, but rather one last chance to show that you can pass the class for any core targets you haven't passed yet.
Here's another possibility: I usually have an Engagement Points category too, that I use for things like completing pre-class prep, attendance, auto-graded online homework, etc. -- stuff that's just checked for being done. I could imagine that both Engagement and the Core final exam have a "vote" on the final grade. For example:
Both engagement & core final are high = increase by 1 letter grade
Both engagement & core final are low = decrease by 1 letter grade
Engagement & final point in opposite directions = no change
At least that means that there are multiple factors leading to the big grade change.
Still not great, but maybe that gives you some ideas to start with?
I think it's great that you are stating the learning target and then posing and addressing your students' question of "But what does that target really mean, in a practical on-the-exam kind of way?" Making explicit connections between LOs/targets and sample questions is far too rare in biology (my field) and perhaps STEM as a whole, and doing so is the essence of the Test Question Template (TQT) system. I also note approvingly that your target explanation says, "You will be given X and you will need to produce Y." I find that so useful that I write my LOs in that format ("given X, do Y" -- as discussed in my guest post here last November).
Thanks, Greg! Perhaps you inspired me to write things in that "given X, do Y" format -- I use it all the time in my learning target explanations.