18 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2019
    1. show

      MWLB--probably a whole bunch of overlapping ones. "Learning is an object," in the show-and-tell sense of 'snow" or "Learning is a performance" in the show-me-your-dance-move sense, for starters.

      Per yoozh, what's obscured?

    2. I use gradeless, descriptive feedback to explain how proficient the student is in that skill area and what they need to work on next.

      How granular are we getting with the skills? How are we determining what constitutes proficiency?

    3. skills

      Devil's in the details here. Bob Shepard link re: skills.

    4. I might as well use a letter grade if don’t explain why, offer descriptive feedback, or give the opportunity to level up.

      "Levels" at very least indicates an ordinal process (or a theoretically ordinal process).

    1. This revised structure, along with the regular classroom critique of each peer’s work, will provide students with the same amount of learning without the pressure of grades penalizing quality of work.

      Yeah--I don't think learning comes in amounts either.

    2. or what a desirable outcome looks like

      Relevant read from earlier today.

    3. or assign grades based on completion.

      "Grades based on completion" perhaps don't deserve the name. To continue the scaling thinking, grading here is a nominal system, assigning values to individuals based on their membership in a class ("completed the work" and "did not complete the work"), which, okay. But that's so different from most of the conversation around grading that using the same term probably muddies the water?

    4. there is an importance to implement some type of system for students to gauge their improvement.

      This calls up the questions about scales. Gauge is a red herring here for that entailment--gauges measure equal interval scales (or ratio scales), but not ordinal ones.

    5. An “A” becomes a sort of seal of congratulatory approval: “Congrats! You nailed my design aesthetic on the head!” while a “B” or “C” becomes a sympathetic foreboding: “Better luck next time.” Not only does this hinder the creativity of students, but it unknowingly forces us into cookie cutter approaches to design.

      Which, if you're designing for someone else, may have some usefulness. But being transparent about that would be important. And probably having that person not just be the professor... Perhaps drawing from a community of people with authentic design needs.

    6. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, beef is graded according to two methods of evaluation: yield grades for the amount of usable lean meat and quality grades for flavor. I see this as a dual system of objective grading (a quantifiable amount)

      Interesting distinction--also relevant to the idea of scales. In this case, you have an interval scale.

    7. the amount of technical refinement in a piece
      1. MWLB -- Pieces of Art Are Containers
      2. "Technical Refinement" is decidedly not an interval scale--and probably shouldn't be referred to as having "amounts"...
    8. objective artistic standards

      This is like a jumbo shrimp jumbo sandwich.

    9. By failing, we learn from our mistakes.
    10. Speaking as a student in Virginia Tech’s graphic design program, more often than not students’ capabilities are limited when their minds are oriented towards getting an “A” on a project rather than testing new strategies.

      I believe this, of course, but this claim seems to be offered here without evidence.`

    11. grades prove more harmful than beneficial because they are heavily subjective.

      Instrumental approach to thinking about the issues surrounding grading.

  2. Aug 2018
  3. Dec 2017