I'll keep track of important links on this page, as well as comments about them.

Krypos challenge

Students participate in a Cryptography exam in WA and OR.

The one question calculus final

Backward Design.

What knowledge, skills, and dispositions do we want them to have learned, practiced, or considered?

Rubrics

I need to make sure the students in 301 have rubric.

In Defense of Lecturing

I have serious issues with many statements in this article. Their arguments were the fears I had when I first started IBL, but after swapping, those arguments are complete garbage.

From Teaching to Learning (In progress)

I found this while reading the "In Defense of Lecturing" article above.

Contract Grading (In progress)

http://languages.oberlin.edu/blogs/ctie/2016/03/27/contract-improv-three-approaches-to-contract-grading/ There are three examples of contract grading given, as well as a bunch of bibliography references to follow. This one has promise.

A Unilateral Grading Contract to Improve Learning and Teaching

As I read this, I'm thinking about how I could implement this in both 301 and 215. In Math 215, I want people to prepare for class, and have discussions with their peers about what they learned. I want them to bring ideas to discuss, and problems to work through. Perhaps this means that the problem set needs many more open ended problems. Maybe the whole IBL process needs revision. But then in terms of grading, I want the peers to hold each other accountable. They need to bring their preparation to class, and the people who will hold them accountable are their peers. This peer evaluation can happen on a weekly basis. Maybe.

In math 301, I think about the writing they do each week. They need to revise their work, in a timely manner, something I could be way better at. If I had a rubric that allowed for nearly instant evaluation. that would be awesome. I'd also love to have them writing more often, and submitting new problems all the time, things that have not yet been taught in class. How do I foster this? How do I assess it?

Professionals in our field do not have common standards for grading; and the “quality” of a multidimensional product can not be fairly or accurately represented with a conventional one-dimensional grade. In the absence of genuinely common standards or a valid way to represent quality, every grade masks the play of hidden biases and a host of other a priori power differentials.

Different teachers don't grade the same way. Every teacher sets up their exams in a way that shows what they value. We do not assess in similar ways. So why not turn some of that power over to the students. A contract helps them do this. And it removes much of the power that teachers wield over students.

Since the time period during the semester is grade-free, students can experience the value and true pay off of their “work”: the intrinsic rewards and pleasures of writing and learning, tangible growth and development as they move from draft to draft, without being under the shadow of a grade.
We give just as much evaluation as ever, and in fact we find ourselves freer to give negative feedback or criticism because it doesn’t betoken a low grade; we can be blunt without being threatening. We know that they know that no matter how much we criticize or even hate their paper, it won’t hurt their grade (up to a B).

What if contract grading in Math 301 took a form like this. To get a B, you must complete 10?? (maybe half the problems in the problem set instead, but submit 10 for grading in a portfolio that highlight things) substantial proofs. Of those, revise 6 proofs to the point that they are logically sound, clear, and concise. You are welcome to revise them as many times as you wish. To obtain an A, you must submit at least 4 that require no revision. Something like this might work. Completely skip the entire exam. I do want to make sure that their proofs cover the entire gammit of types of proofs, so there needs to be requirements about what they must submit. Maybe a portfolio is the key.

If we seek to use physical exercise for health or fitness, the message from experienced people is the same: just keep going through the motions; trust it; it's the process that counts. If we seek enlightenment or just an empty mind, wise people tell us that it's a trap to focus on the goal itself. Ritual itself is founded on process. Whether it's shaking hands or saying the pledge of allegiance, the idea is to go through the outward motion whether or not you can get your mind to be fully committed to the inward meaning. William James famously argued that actions are not caused by emotions or beliefs; rather actions lead to emotions or beliefs.

Specifications Grading

As I think about Math 215, the last paper above seems perfect. Weekly in class quizzes are one way to pass things. I could have weekly in testing center quizzes... What about Proctorio graded stuff? Quizzes could get longer and longer each week, still containing questions from the weeks before. Grading, and regrading, seems like it could be a nightmare. Maybe not. One quiz per week, on which the students can tackle as many problems as they want, could be useful. I'm envisioning a page with questions, and then the rest would be pages for student responses. Each week, the number of questions grows.

I do think it is interesting that only 11% of students mastered one of the end of semester objectives. They truly do "give up" on learning at the end of the semester with this approach. That is concerning, or should be included in the design. Basically, anything that hasn't been discussed in class by Thanksgiving will be ignored.... Or it needs to be assessed in a different way.

I loved the article above. It's written by a mathematician teaching CS majors. I think it has lots of merit. One thing I liked was the "you can only submit two things per week". This would be extremely useful in math 301. A Pass/Fail would be wonderful as well, in terms of grading 301 (which is basically what I currently have - Complete/NeedsWork). However, only being allowed to submit 2 per week stops procrastination, and forces them to learn about quality. They can come see me if they are worried. He did comment that the "2 per week" stopped some students from getting anything higher than a C.

I'm thinking about quizzes in Math 215. Why not keep a "grade on your own" component with the quizzes, and then allow them to pass off skills only after they've passed them off in the quizzes. I could easily number objectives for the entire semester this way. I basically already have 25-30 key objectives. If they first get to pass them off on a quiz, and then in a proctored environment pass them off officially, it could easily reduce grading time.

Math 215 - Have a testing center exam every 2 weeks (this is the pass of time). The exam contains all the problems that are new, as well as all the older problems (and the students can submit as many as they wish). There is no time limit at this point. The students can practice all topics on self graded quizzes first (or rather they should). Then they have to take the mastery quiz, which is graded pass/fail (scrap my 4/2/0 system).

As for class participation in IBL, it seems simple. Just require the students to be within 1 presentation of the median/mean of all presentations for an A. Within 2, for a B, and within 3 for a C. I'll need to amend this based on number of students in a course (small classes may need more presentations in this gap). Maybe a C can be obtained without presentations, or maybe it can be half as many as the total? A percentage based approach to presentations should fix thing. I do want C level students presenting, so if they fail to present, then they are not allowed to pass.

How do I grade before class work and reports? Every day of class they are required to upload their work (electronic format), pick a problem or two they are ready to present, and .... Maybe that is all.

Does any of this prepare them for graduate school? I think it does. Forget the "qualifier" exams.

What about group exams? Is there anything that could fit into this? This paper does not address it.

I like (1) keeping online self-quizzes before the actual pass off (how to include it?) (2) limiting the number of submissions on written work in Math 301, (3) testing center pass off days, (4) presentations required as percentage of mean/median.

I love the following quote.

Rather, faculty who allow revisions as part of their specs should place a mark after each sentence containing an error, then let the student figure what was wrong and how to correct it.

A possible concern - Pure Clustering (how do they learn to distinguish differing objectives)

I'm guessing that in specifications grading, you just make sure you have a question that requires students to be able to do this. What I see currently is a ton of "block" practice. That makes for a really crappy transition to other courses. That is one of my major concerns.

SBG (Specifications Based Grading) Kate Owens

While reading the comments of the above post, she mentioned creating an automated system to test students. Maybe we can use Knewton to do that, or webworks, or MapleTA. That sounds like it could work in low level courses. Not in Math 301 probably, but in college algebra it could. Maybe one day a week would be devoted to taking tests on a computer. Deliver a password to students in class, and let them take as many as they want... I do think proctoring needs to remain.

Techniques grading

Gives an introductory explanation of difference between SG and SBG (specifications grading and standards based grading). With link to paper to read more. See http://thalestriangles.blogspot.com/2018/09/prologue-to-syllabus.html for more.

This method has merit. It basically picks and chooses what you want from both SG and SBG. Not sure how IBL fits into this, or even if I need to keep IBL.

Points based grading - Demotivation

Start here, and follow the leads.

So what do we do about this? For me, the course of action is clear: We need to walk away from traditional grading --- in which I include not only multi-interval letter grades but also grades based on statistical point accumulation. We've seen enough. Grades are harmful to students' well-being; they do not provide accurate information for employers, academic programs, or even students themselves; and they steer student motivations precisely where we in higher education do not want those motivations to go. There is no coherent argument you can make any more that traditional grading is the best approach, in terms of what's best for students, to evaluating student work. If we value our students, we'll start being creative and courageous in replacing traditional grading with something better.

Thoughts about IBL - Problems

Class time is not really engaging. It involves 1 person speaking, not 25% or more of the class. The amount of questions that can be discussed is minimal. It is not the best use of class time. These are my thought's while reading http://rtalbert.org/return-to-specs-grading-modern-algebra/. So what do I change?

  • Maybe have 4 presenters start with discussing their work to a small group, where their role as a group is to present to the class. Rather than one person presenting just their stuff, why not have one person assigned as the presenter, and then several people assigned to help them. Give them 10 minutes to discuss the proof, make any needed adaptions, put work up on the board and organize it, and then spend time sharing. This might work better. Maybe even keep the same groups over the span of a few weeks. The point is NOT to have completely accurate presentations. However, I DO want to have people share their work, get feedback. Having a group present something removes some individual accountability, but that's not what the presentations were doing anyway. Not sure if this is the right change.

Great quote on EMRF - avoiding F grades.

  • http://rtalbert.org/specs-grading-emrf-2/->Another way this saves time is that I very rarely get work that evaluates to an F. Since students can redo assessments through the semester, if they find themselves taking an assessment and can't produce a coherent finished project, they just bail out, and the work never gets turned in. And that's exactly what they should do, and make plans to try again next time.

This is great.

Accumulation Grading - another person's take on Specs

Discusses the problem of including correctness and clarity into specs.

Andragogy

I'm teaching adults. I really like the part in the paper above about self-evaluation. Nothing is more irritating as an adult than to have others evaluate your work and grade it. Why not let grading be in their hands. They can evaluate their own work. Exams don't have to have a grade, rather they can provide students with evidence of what they know, or don't know. Their job is to collect evidence of what they have mastered. They can accumulate as much evidence as they want to gain the grade they want for a class. This now goes back to specifications grading.

However, I have no clue how that will work in Math 301. I guess I can tell them whether or not a proof is logically sound or not. As an adult, you do get told in mathematics when your stuff is not logically sound. This is often done through a question, rather than by someone telling you that you are wrong. Instead, you discover yourself that something is wrong because someone asked you a question that you could not answer. Maybe grading of proofs should switch to me asking questions, as I suggest in class. Then the student gets the benefit of learning to self evaluate, rather than me grading something.

Punished By Rewards

So, in Alfie Kohn's book, at the end of chapter 3, I'm intrigued by the following:

people who are offered rewards tend to choose easier tasks, are less efficient in using the information available to solve novel problems, and tend to be answer oriented and more illogical in their problem solving strategies. They seem to work harder and porduce more activity, but the activity is of a lower quality, contains more errors, and is more stereotyped and less creative than the work of comparable nonrewarded subjects working on the same problems.

What this makes me think about is how I award points for student presentations. I do it precisely because it is a method of controlling students. I want to force them to present, or they fail the class. It is definitely a control feature. Who does it help? Me. It makes sure there are students in class ready to present, and that the presenters who share vary. Does it really help the student? I'm not sure it does. As such, I think this "creative" task is probably being killed by the sheer act of assigning points. Am I willing to see what happens if I drop recording anything (other than keeping track so I make sure I try to evenly assign out the presenters). I could then move to volunteers, and pick presenters based off of volunteering. I think I'm OK with this.

This book is making me completely rethink IBL's presentation system. It is based 100% in the praise model. Imagine if the homework posed a question that was very open ended, and lead to a discussion in small groups in class the next day. Example. A train is moving from A to B. It will arrive at B at time y, and left A at time x. We want to intercept the train (to rob it, deliver something to it, bomb it, whatever) (or have it be a caravan with a terrorist inside that we plan to assasinate). We need to know exactly where the train will be at any time, so we can intercept it. Give a formula that allows us to make this kind of prediction. What does this do? It places the homework on solving problems, not on answering a prerigged set of problems. It opens up discussion. There are so many "right" ways to do this. Then let groups discuss their ideas. Have several share what they did. Open up discourse (rather than one person presenting their way to do it). I can share my ways for organizing, but they are not any better than others. I can even compare/constrast them to past ways from other classes. I don't have to introduce things just because I like them (that will be hard).

What I need is a curriculum that asks open ended questions, for every class. Why have close ended questions with specific answers needing to be given. Why not have a problem, have several questions that do have close ended responses, and several very open ended, and the homework for the night is to answer the questions that seem relevant, dig into the book for more information and practice, and work on developing your skills in whatever your field is. Then class time can be used as a discussion of the ideas involved in the preparation. The problem with just about EVERYTHING I have ever written is that the work is closed ended. Every problem has a specific answer in mind. Every problem generally has a specific solution technique in mind (when I write it, and then I'm happy when students do it differently). I guess I need to have less specifics, more open ended questions, and go from there.

Time to read TJ Hitchman's book, or at least start it to get a glimpse of what he does. I know he starts every discussion after the presentation with praise, on purpose. Is that needed? It might be, but rather than praise I think it can be encouragement (I'll have to practice...). I've got a lot to do.

Andragogy

I think self reflection papers will help students learn to They learn to grasp their: Motivations. Needs. Interests. Goals. Capacities. So I should find a way to incorporate this into the class.

"Andragogy is not a theory of adult learning, but it is an educational ideaology rooted in an inquiry-based learning and teaching paradigm.

In contrast to pedagogy - transmitting content in a logical sequence; andragogy seeks to design and manage a process for facilitating the acquisition of content by the learners.

  • A global perspective on andragog - an update. A PDF I downloaded.

I can use the research journal to help them learn to be self-directed. However, I need to learn more about how to make this effective. I need more time with Andragogy. I also think I should go back to the journaling articles I read at the start and dismissed. Linda Nilson's book described some of this (time to reread?)

Khan Academy Video on Master Learning