ABSTRACT
It is often the case that computer science classrooms use traditional grading practices where points are allocated to assignments, mistakes result in point deductions, and assignment scores are combined using some form of weighted averaging to determine grades. Unfortunately, traditional grading practices have been shown to reduce achievement, discourage students, and suppress effort to such an extent that some common elements of traditional grading practices have been termed toxic. Using grades to reward or punish student behavior does not encourage learning and instead increases anxiety and stress. These toxic elements are present throughout computing education and computer science classrooms in the form of late penalties, lack of credit for code that doesn't compile or pass certain unit tests, among others. These types of metrics, that evaluate behavior are often influenced by implicit bias, factors outside of the classrooms (e.g., part-time employment), and family life situations (e.g., students who are caregivers). Often, students in these situations are disproportionately from low-socioeconomic backgrounds and predominantly students of color. Through this paper, we will present a case for adoption of equitable grading practices and a call for additional support in classroom and teaching technologies as well as support from administrations both at the department and university level. By adopting a community of practice approach, we argue that we can support new faculty making these changes, which would be more equitable and inclusive. Further, these practices have been shown to better support student learning and can help increase student learning gains and retention.
- Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., and Hanson, D. L. 2009. Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers' views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching 46, 10, 1090--1113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20343.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Association for Computing Machinery CC2020 Task Force. 2020. Computing Curricula 2020: Paradigms for Global Computing Education. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/education/curricula-recommendations/cc2020.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Blackboard. 2021. Educational Technology Services | Blackboard | North America. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.blackboard.com/Google Scholar
- Blanton, M. L. and Stylianou, D. A. 2009. Interpreting a Community of Practice Perspective in Discipline-Specific Professional Development in Higher Education. Innovative Higher Education 34, 2 (2009/06/01), 79--92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10755-008--9094--8.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bowen, J. A. 2012. Teaching naked: How moving technology out of your college classroom will improve student learning. John Wiley & Sons. San Francisco, CA, USA.Google Scholar
- Canvas, P. 2020. Introduction to the Learning Mastery Gradebook. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1881551/pages/introduction-to-the-learning-mastery-gradebook?module_item_id=22916901Google Scholar
- Chalmers, L. and Keown, P. 2006. Communities of practice and professional development. International Journal of Lifelong Education 25, 2, 139--156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02601370500510793.Google ScholarCross Ref
- CodeGrade. 2020. CodeGrade. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.codegrade.com/Google Scholar
- CodeWorkout. (2021). CodeWorkout. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://codeworkout.cs.vt.edu/Google Scholar
- Craig, T. A. 2011. Effects of standards-based report cards on student learning Ph.D. Dissertation. Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA. https://www.proquest.com/docview/926432787Google Scholar
- Docker. 2021. Empowering App Development for Developers. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.docker.com/Google Scholar
- Dueck, M. 2014. Grading smarter, not harder: Assessment strategies that motivate kids and help them learn. ASCD, Alexandria, VA, USA.Google Scholar
- Dweck, C. S. 2007. Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Edwards, S. H. 2004. Using software testing to move students from trial-and-error to reflection-in-action. In Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '04) ACM, Norfolk, Virginia, USA, 26--30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/971300.971312Google ScholarDigital Library
- Edwards, S. H. 2019. Web-CAT: the Web-based Center for Automated Testing - Web-CAT. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from http://web-cat.org/Google Scholar
- Edwards, J., Ditton, J., Trninic, D., Swanson, H., Sullivan, S., & Mano, C. 2020. Syntax exercises in CS1. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER '20), Virtual Event, New Zealand. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3372782.3406259Google ScholarDigital Library
- Edwards, S. H. and Murali, K. P. 2017. CodeWorkout: Short Programming Exercises with Built-in Data Collection. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '17) ACM, Bologna, Italy, 188--193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3059055.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Feldman, J., 2019. Grading for equity: What it is, why it matters, and how it can transform schools and classrooms. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, California, USA.Google Scholar
- Gradescope. 2020. Gradescope. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.gradescope.com/Google Scholar
- Great School Partnership. 2020. Research Supporting Proficiency-Based Learning: Grading + Reporting. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.greatschoolspartnership.org/proficiency-based-learning/research-evidence/research-supporting-ten-principles-grading-reporting/Google Scholar
- Gunawardena, C. N., Hermans, M. B., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., and Tuttle, R. 2009. A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educational Media International 46, 1, 3--16.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Guskey, T. R. 2000. Grading policies that work against standards - and how to fix them. NASSP Bulletin, 84, 620, 20--29. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263650008462003Google ScholarCross Ref
- INGInious. 2021. UCL-INGI/INGInious. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://github.com/UCL-INGI/INGIniousGoogle Scholar
- Instructure. 2021a. Higher Education LMS | Canvas for Colleges & Universities. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.instructure.com/product/higher-education/canvas-lmsGoogle Scholar
- Instructure. 2021b. How do I use the Learning Mastery Gradebook to view outcome results in a course? Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://community.canvaslms.com/t5/Instructor-Guide/How-do-I-use-the-Learning-Mastery-Gradebook-to-view-outcome/ta-p/775Google Scholar
- Lave, J. and Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Leinonen, A., Nygren, H., Pirttinen, N., Hellas, A., and Leinonen, J. 2019. Exploring the Applicability of Simple Syntax Writing Practice for Learning Programming. In Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '19). Minneapolis, MN, USA, ACM, 84--90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287378Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lotter, C., Yow, J. A., & Peters, T. T. 2014. BUILDING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE AROUND INQUIRY INSTRUCTION THROUGH A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 12, 1 (2014/02/01), 1--23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012--9391--7.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mak, B. and Pun, S.-H. 2015. Cultivating a teacher community of practice for sustainable professional development: beyond planned efforts. Teachers and Teaching 21, 1 (2015/01/02), 4--21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2014.928120.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mirsky, G. M. 2018. Effectiveness of specifications grading in teaching technical writing to computer science students. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 34, 1 (October 2018), 104--110. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/3280489.3280505Google Scholar
- Moodle. 2021a. Competencies - MoodleDocs. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://docs.moodle.org/311/en/CompetenciesGoogle Scholar
- Moodle. (2021b). Moodle - Open-source learning platform | Moodle.org. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://moodle.org/Google Scholar
- Nilson, L. B. 2015. Specifications grading: Restoring rigor, motivating students, and saving faculty time. Stylus Publishing, LLC, Sterling, VA, USA.Google Scholar
- Pintrich, P. R. and De Groot, E. V. 1990. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational Psychology 82, 1, 33--40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pope, L., Parker, H. B., and Ultsch, S. 2020. Assessment of Specifications Grading in an Undergraduate Dietetics Course. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. 52, 4, 439--446. https://www.jneb.org/article/S1499--4046(19)30959--5/fulltextGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Prasad, P. V. 2020. Using Revision and Specifications Grading to Develop Students' Mathematical Habits of Mind. PRIMUS, 30:8--10, 908--925, DOI: 10.1080/10511970.2019.1709589Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rapaport, W. J. 2011. A triage theory of grading: The good, the bad, and the middling. Teaching Philosophy 34, 4, 347--372. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/teachphil201134447.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rapaport, W. J. 2012. HOW I GRADE. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/howigrade.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Reeves, D. B. 2008. Leading to Change / Effective Grading Practices. ACSD. Retrieved 1 August 2023 from https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/effective-grading-practicesGoogle Scholar
- Sanft, K. R. , Drawert, B., and Whitley, A. 2021. Modified specifications grading in computer science: preliminary assessment and experience across five undergraduate courses. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 36, 5, 34--46. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/3447307.3447310Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schunk, D. H. and Zimmerman, B. J. 1998. Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice. Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Shoen, H. L., Cebulla, K. J., Finn, K. F., and Fi, C. 2003. Teacher Variables That Relate to Student Achievement When Using a Standards-Based Curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education JRME 34, 3 (01 May. 2003), 228--261. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3003477Google ScholarCross Ref
- Townsley, M., & Buckmiller, T. 2016. What Does the Reesearch Say about Standards-Based Grading? A Research Primer. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED590391Google Scholar
- Wenger-Trayner, E. and Wenger-Trayner, B. 2015. Communities of practice: a brief overview of the concept and its issues. https://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/Google Scholar
- Wenger, E., 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Wenger, E. McDermott, R. A., and Snyder, W. 2002. Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.Google Scholar
- Winne, P. H. 1997. Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of educational Psychology 89, 3, 397--410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.397.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zimmerman, B. J. 2000. Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of self-regulation, M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrinch, and M. Zeidner Eds. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA, 13--39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890--2/50031--7.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Transforming Grading Practices in the Computing Education Community
Recommendations
Grading for Equity: A Curriculum Development and Grading Process to Enhance Instruction
SIGCSE '21: Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationIn Grading for EQUITY: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms, Joe Feldman states 'The ways we grade disproportionately favor students with privilege and disproportionately harm students with less privilege.' (2019, ...
Equitable Grading Best Practices
SIGCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2Why do instructors have the grading policies they do (e.g., rigid assignment deadlines, curved grading, exams with no "clobber" where a high performance on a later exam overwrites an earlier poor score, etc.)? Chances are, it's because that was the way (...
Comments