Esteemed colleagues, our case has rested on three established truths: 1) Grades are used as a communication tool regarding the student’s level of achievement. The challenge for each instructor is to develop rubrics and assessments that are accurate tools of what was taught during a course. If the class is well designed with appropriate rubrics, and tests/assignments are based upon learning objectives, the final grade should be an accurate measurement and reflection of student learning.

The second established truth is 2) Final grades are an appropriate measure of student learning as they allow us to evaluate student achievement at the end of a unit or course and compare the outcomes against a standard or benchmark. One major reason for assigning grades is to create a public record of the student’s academic achievement to effectively communicate the level of mastery that has been demonstrated to parents, teachers, guidance counselors, school officials, educational institutions, and employers.

We have suggested that 3) Grades can be used as motivational tools as well as help students to develop good study habits. Some students also reported that grades provided a measurable marker of progress and level of understanding. Some students are motivated by the achievement of a grade which positively influences them to prepare for class/learn in class.

Finally, our opponents contend that instructors utilize a point system which is arbitrary in nature. The reality is that different assessment measures can be used to determine different kinds of learning. With that, we end this summary and reiterate the evidence that leads to our final argument that grading is a true measurement to assess student learning.

Our opponents state that “final course grades do not accurately reflect student learning … [and] indicate knowledge and skills at a superficial level.” Our opponents may believe that final grades are superficial, but we contend that this would only be the case if their course assessments throughout were also superficial. If one is able to design meaningful and authentic learning experiences and assessments for them, then in theory the final grade should also reflect this deep and meaningful progress.

Our opponents contend that instructors utilize a point system which is arbitrary in nature. If this is the case, we wonder why our opponents have taken obvious pains to score high points on this assignment. We contend that though a point system is determined by the instructor, it reflects the importance and priority of the criteria for authentic learning. Further, we believe that contrary to reducing the amount of intellectual risk taken by students, assessments with a clear high stakes have been to improve standardized test scores.1

We concur that using a pass-fail system of grading may benefit students intrinsic motivation. However, we challenge our opponents to produce evidence that it is incompatible to incorporate final grades into a pass-fail rubric.

We concur that final grades provide one data point. However, this data point is informed by many other assessments throughout the semester and thus should be conceptualized more as a forest level view compared to a single tree.

Our opponents employ a false dichotomy to conclude that because every research question does not need a quantitative analysis, student learning should also not be measured quantitatively. The reality is that different assessment measures can be used to determine different kinds of learning. The power of good assessment throughout the semester can be seen in a valid way though final grades.

1. Wiliam D. Standardized testing and school accountability. Ed. Psych, 2010;45(2) 107-122. doi: 10.1080/00461521003703060

ProTEAM 1 - Debate Question 2

Student achievement and proficiency in the United States are measured by nationally normed standardized assessments, state assessments, and district assessments. Due to educational reform and the No Child Left Behind legislation that was passed in 2001, these large scale assessments were implemented because they are easy to administer, inexpensive, and the results are transparent to policymakers, legislators, accrediting bodies, administrators, teachers, parents, and students. However, the validity and psychometric quality of large scale assessments have been widely debated.1

Grades are used as a communication tool regarding the student’s level of achievement.2 The primary purpose is to communicate student accomplishments so that informed decisions can be made about the student’s future.3 It has also been suggested that that a major reason for assigning grades is to create a public record of the student’s academic achievement to effectively communicate the level of mastery that has been demonstrated to parents, teachers, guidance counselors, school officials, educational institutions, and employers.2-4 Grades can be used as motivational tools as well as helping students to develop good study habits.2,4 Some students also reported that grades provided a measurable marker of progress and level of understanding.5

Final grades are appropriate measures of student learning as they allow us to evaluate student learning at the end of a unit or course and compare the outcomes against a standard or benchmark. They can also be used as a reference point to help guide future learning in subsequent courses. In theory, final grades can be used as a proxy of a student’s long-term memory. If the class is designed well with appropriate rubrics, and tests/assignments are based upon learning objectives, the final grade should be an accurate measure of the learning from that class.6,7

(Formatting of the superscripts did not cross over, therefore they are listed behind the sentence).

References:

1. Guskey TR. Multiple sources of evidence: An analysis of stakeholders’ perceptions of various indicators of student learning. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. Spring 2007:19-27.

2. Allen JD. Grades as valid measures of academic achievement of classroom learning. The Clearing House. 2005; 78(5): 218-223.

3. Bailey J, McTighe J. Reporting achievement at the secondary level: What and how. In Guskey. 1996: 119–40.

4. Oosterhof A. Classroom application of educational measurement. 2001. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

5. Krawczyk, RM. Effects of grading on student learning and alternative assessment strategies. Retrieved from Sophia, the St. Catherine University repository website:https://sophia.stkate.edu/maed/223.

6. Dixson DD, Worrell FC. Formative and Summative Assessment in the Classroom. Theory into Practice 2016;55(2):153-159.

7. Kibble JD. Best practices in summative assessment. Adv Physiol Educ. 2017;41:110-111.