Abstract #260
Section: Teaching/Undergraduate and Graduate Education (orals)
Session: Teaching/Undergraduate and Graduate Education: Strategies for Assessing Student Learning
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Monday 3:00 PM–3:30 PM
Location: Room 264
Presentation is being recorded
Session: Teaching/Undergraduate and Graduate Education: Strategies for Assessing Student Learning
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Monday 3:00 PM–3:30 PM
Location: Room 264
Presentation is being recorded
# 260
Why do we assess?
D. Guberman*1, 1Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Key Words: pedagogy, assessment, inclusion
Speaker Bio
Why do we assess?
D. Guberman*1, 1Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Most of us rely upon a multi-interval grading schema (A, B, C, etc.), but there is little consensus regarding what these symbols mean. Three common views include: a measure of student learning and growth, a representation of student achievement, and a comparison of achievement between students. Currently, our grading systems are opaque, transcripts give no indication of a particular class’s grading philosophy, and few instructors openly discuss their philosophies with their students. In this presentation, I seek to spark a discussion about this core artifact of student achievement and assessment, focusing on 3 points rooted in existing scholarship: (1) Research on teaching and learning has highlighted the importance of transparency for student success. While these discussions have often focused on the level of individual assignments, I hypothesize that the same is true at the level of courses and grades. I ask that we self-reflect on what we want to communicate with grades and how we can share this message with our students. (2) Current grading systems can cause harm, as evidenced in research on stereotype threat, social belonging, and growth mindsets. Thus, these practices contribute to achievement and completion gaps that disproportionately impact underrepresented students, first-generation students, and students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. (3) There are alternatives to current grading systems, such as competency-based systems and developmental feedback systems. I offer concrete ideas for how we can structure entire classes without grades, as well as how we can create “ungraded” structures within current systems. Current grading schemes are symbolic of the banking system of education, in which instructors deposit knowledge into students, students regurgitate that knowledge on demand, and the relationship ends when the students are sorted into an order based on their regurgitational prowess. By moving to other systems, we find opportunities to embrace higher education as more than feeding facts and skills. Education becomes a practice of freedom, which will leave students empowered to make meaningful decisions in complex situations throughout their lives, while contributing productively to a democratic society.
Key Words: pedagogy, assessment, inclusion
Speaker Bio
Daniel Guberman, Ph.D., is an instructional developer in the Center for Instructional Excellence at Purdue University. Dan’s work, rooted in critical pedagogy, is focused on providing equitable learning opportunities for all students, while promoting the scholarship of teaching and learning. He provides consultations to faculty and graduate instructors, co-leads the Teaching Certificate Program, coordinates and delivers workshops, and organizes reading groups on pedagogy for faculty and staff. As a faculty developer and musicologist, his recent publications have appeared on the Noba Psychology Blog; in Tyranny, Resistance and Music; American Music; New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development; and The Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness. He has been interviewed and cited in The New York Times and The Chronicle of Higher Education for his work on Gen Z students in college.