ICCTE Conference Catherine WassonGraduate Teacher Education Belhaven University Thursday – May 24, 2012
CURRENT PERFORMANCE Exam & Portfolio CONGRUENCE Exitexpectations Course outcomes CONCERNS Intervention/Remediation Program redesign
What is the relationship between performance on program exit requirements (exam & portfolio) and program grade point average?
Program Effectiveness Teacher education programs inadequately prepare graduates to meet the realities of today’s standards-based, accountability-driven classrooms . . . . Levine, 2006 Educating the highly skilled, creative thinkers who can compete in the global economy requires a change in the way teachers are trained. Tucker, 2011
CCSS implementation To improve teacher quality, policymakers . . . must consider whether teacher education programs are aligned to these (CCSS) standards. Perry, 2011, p. 2 The Common Core State Standards should influence every part of every teacher preparation program . . . . SMTI/TLC, 2011, p. 3
are currentgrading practicesserving God,serving others,or serving self?
2007-09 n = 114 r = .340 2010-11 n =81 r = .414
2007-09 n =114 r = .385 2010-11 n = 81 r = .387
Defined . . . “net” increase in grades resulting from changes to grading practices and standards over time, independent of other contributing factors. ASHE, 2005, p. 30 Supported – just a few of MANY stats!! Only 10-20% of college students received grades lower than B-. Farley (1995) as reported by Sooner, 2000 1969 - 7% grade of A- or higher, 26% grade of C or less 1993 – 26% grade of A- or higher, 9%grade of C or less Vanderslice, 2004 NOT supported Most evidence is anecdotal or reported perceptions; limited empirical evidence exists . ASHE, 2005
Grade Increase Gross measure of the trend of college grades over time without consideration of changes in other related factors (p. 29). Data support a general upward trend. Grade Compression Inability of grades to differentiate student performance; current empirical evidence does not support. Grading Disparity Empirical evidence supports significant disparities in grades among different courses and disciplines. ASHE, 2005
Place immediate self-interests over long-term outcomes; equate good grades to attaining high paying jobs Martinson, 2004 Value social learning more than academic learning; select courses with little reading, few requirements, and ―easy‖ instructors and don‘t esteem courses that promote academic learning or professional preparation Arum & Roksa, 2011
Good grades = good evaluations = tenure, promotion, and better pay Germain & Scandura, 2005; Lanning & Perkins, 1995 ―Disengagement compact‖ I give minimal work and higher grades; you accept limited grading of assignments and feedback. Arum & Roksa, 2011; Cushman, 2003 ―Other-directedness‖ Need for approval from students; popularity takes precedence over standards in grading. Cushman, 2003
Keeping the customer happy sustains current tuition & future contributions Cushman, 2003 Diversion of resources to student services—fastest growing employment category in higher education Decline in full-time tenure track faculty – from 78% in 1970 to 52% in 2005; adjuncts are more cost effective Arum & Roksa, 2011
Themission of the AAUP ―is to . . . ensure higher education‘s contribution to the common good‖. Cushman, 2003, p. 454 Gradeintegrity – extent to which grade equates to quality of performance. Sadler, 2009 Serving―common good‖ requires GPA‘s to be a valid reflection of students‘ abilities and talents. Cushman, 2003
Decision Making Rationale Graduate & Based on college professional schools grades, employers have difficulty in applicants that can distinguishing the succeed or excel most and least Employers competent applicants with skills applicants. and potential for Vanderslice, 2004 fulfilling job responsibilities Walhout1997
Self-Understanding Rationale Obscure relationship Students between grades and progress, student learning; improvement, and students have potential for success difficulty correctly Faculty judging their own competence. evaluation and Vanderslice, 2004 instructional practices Walhout1997
Ethical Considerations Work judged on its quality; not other factors Basis of judgments known; no surprises Grades comparable across courses in program (no courses characterized as ―lenient‖ or ―tough‖) courses offered by institution institutions Sadler, 2009
Doing the Right Thing Resurrect and maintain high standards Cushman, 2003 Reclaim ―gate keeper‖ role; rightly discriminate between the different learning levels of students. Lanning & Perkins, 1995; Walhout, 1997
Anyone who cares alot about somethingis very critical inmaking judgmentsabout it. Far fromthe opposite ofcaring, beingcritical is the veryconsequence ofcaring. Vanderslice, 2004, p. 25
Grading disparity Correlated specific course grades to outcome measures Grading patterns Compare grade distributions to faculty perceptions of student performance Embedding outcomes Explicit performance outcomes Align course and exit outcomes Monitor and manage student progress
Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Cushman, T. (2003). Who best to tame grade inflation? Academic Questions, 16(4), 48-56.Germain, M., & Scandura, T. A. (2005). Grade inflation and student individual differences as systematic bias in faculty evaluations. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(1), 58-67.Hu, S., Ed. (2005). Beyond grade inflation: Grading problems in higher education. ASHE Higher Education Report, 30(6), 1-80.Lanning, W., & Perkins, P. (1995). Grade inflation: A consideration of additional causes. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 22(2), 163-168.Levine, A. (2006). Taming the wild west of teacher education. Scholastic. http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/taming- wild-west-teacher-education.Martinson, D. L. (2004). A perhaps ―politically incorrect‖ solution to the very real problem of grade inflation. College Teaching, 52(2), 47-51.
Perry, A. (2011). Teacher preparation programs: A critical vehicle to drive student achievement. Re:VISION, 1, 1-8.Sadler, B. R. (2009). Grade integrity and the representation of academic achievement. Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 807- 826.SMTI/TLC. Discussion Paper. The Common Core State Standards and Teacher Preparation: The Role of Higher Education. http://www.aplu.org/document.doc?id=3482.Sonner, B. S. (2000). A is for ‗adjunct‘: Examining grade inflation in higher education. Journal of Education for Business, 76(1), 5-9.Tucker, M. S. (2011). Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: An American Agenda for Educational Reform. Boston: Harvard Education Press.Vanderslice, R. (2004). When I was young, an A was an A: Grade inflation in higher education. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 84(4), 24-25.Walhout, D. (1997). Grading across a career. College Teaching, 45(3), 83-91.