Grading,
grading, grading, when does it ever stop? While it can get tiring, it is an
essential component to teaching as it gives a good indication of how your students
are performing in your classes. But with every concept comes a model or a
theory and I’ve been thinking a lot about two very different types of grade
distribution.
Bell
Curves
Retrieved from: http://aweekinthelifeofaredhead.com/a-bell-curve/
While it
is not necessarily essential in high schools and elementary schools this model
is prominent in many post-secondary institutes. The bell curve works as a “normal
distribution” model which means it presents the standard deviations of the
scores at the bottom (the average between different sets of scores). The “0” or the middle of the graph is the mean and average of the scores (top
of the bell) and the two halves are the other 50% of the scores. If that is too
complicated for you non-stat majors imagine it like this: 100 students take a
test and their scores are put on a bell curve model. A few but equal number of
students receive As and Fs a small but equal number of students receive Bs and
Ds and the majority fall in the C range. This is considered grading on the
curve (Yount, 2011).
While
this system seem good in theory, with the highest percentile receiving As and
lowest percentile receiving Fs (such scientific grading tools are supposedly far
superior to any form of bias that can arise in other forms of grading) I argue
that it is not a good form of grading. The biggest fault of the bell curve
model is that for every score in the positive percentile there must be an equal
score in the negative percentile for a “normal” distribution to be formed
(Yount, 2011). This gives students no guidance on how to do well in school,
they are only marked on their final place on the curve in relation to fellow
peers (Yount, 2011). I have personally been in courses where this type of
grading system is used and it is detrimental to the learning environment. For
instance, in one of my first year university classes this grading system was
implemented to decide our final grade. Throughout the year I witnessed a lot of
students have anxiety about their mark in this class as well as hostility
towards their peers because it became a sort of “competition”. What was so
frustrating was that all the teacher instruction, group interaction, and
individual growth that happened in the class didn’t even matter because your
marks only mattered in relation to the average. I received a decent grade on
the final exam but finished the class with a low mark because the average of
the class was higher than my exam mark. This made me feel like my successes
throughout the semester were irrelevant because this one assessment stifled my
growth. There is no chance for success at the individual level as this form of
assessment only benefits a certain number of people, there is no chance for
everyone to be successful.
J-
Curves
Retrieved from http://rube.asq.org/edu/2009/11/problem-solving/apply-a-j-curve-to-achieve-success-not-perpetuate-excuses-.pdf
This is what
brings me to a new innovative model that I think is much more effective in
distributing grades. The J curve is a distribution model that shows a dip in
grades for some students but an increase for most (Drake, Joanee, & Koholon,
2014). The philosophy behind this model is that while some students may be
unsuccessful at the task, most will reach the learning goals. This model was
built on the premise that with proper instruction and a healthy learning
environment anyone can be successful (Mikels & Sartori, 2009). What I appreciate
about this model is that every student has the opportunity to work at their own
pace and reach their level of achievement without the added pressure of meeting
or beating the average. Students are able to focus on individual growth (Mikels
& Sartori, 2009)
While both of these are grading
distribution models, I believe the philosophies that influenced them also have
a strong hold in schools. So while bell curve and j curve models are not
necessarily used as assessment tools in elementary schools and high schools,
the ideas behind these models influence assessment. For example, assessment of
learning (AoL) is a still a prominent form of assessment in schooling. Similar to the
bell curve model, AoL reports on achieved learning through things like tests
and quizzes (Drake et al.., 2014). Furthermore, forms of AoL can also be
standardized and compared to ministry standards (Drake et al., 2014). A similar
philosophy is present here because the education system is assessing each
student in the same way and seeing if they meet the “requirements” of the
ministry, which is a far cry from how learning actually works. In contrast the
J curve philosophy has similar principles to assessment for learning (AfL). In
AfL assessment is continuous through the learning process, with feedback about
performance (strengths, things to improve on) consistent (Drake et al., 2014).
What is important about this is that comparison to other students is irrelevant;
the sole focus is on student growth.
What is unfortunate
is that AoL and the “bell curve mentality” is still the prominent form of
assessment used in schools today. I have asked a few teachers over the years
what were normal averages for their class and they would say things like “60-75%”.
Why are some many schools focused on sameness and what students in the “normal
range” should be receiving? This limits the abilities of all students because
they already have a predestined position on a scale. As future teachers we
should push for the J curve mentality and help students define their own learning
experiences and be successful in their own right. And hopefully get a few 100s
along the way J If you want to learn more about the J curve, heres a link to a brief completed by a low income school that implemented the j-curve with great results!!
Finally, here's an article I feel summarizes the importance of switching from the "bell curve mentality" to the "j curve mentality"
References
Bell Curve (Online Image) (2005). Retrieved from http://aweekinthelifeofaredhead.com/a-bell-curve/
Drake,
S., Joanee, R.L., & Kolohon, W. (2014). Interweaving
curriculum and classroom assessment: Engaging the 21st century
learner. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.
J Curve (Online Image) (2009). Retrieved from http://rube.asq.org/edu/2009/11/problem-solving/apply-a-j-curve-to-achieve-success-not-perpetuate-excuses-.pdf
Mikels,
L., & Sartori, T. (2009, November). ASQ-
Apply a J-Curve to Achieve Success, Not Perpetuate Excuses. Retrieved from http://rube.asq.org/edu/2009/11/problem-solving/apply-a-j-curve-to-achieve-success-not-perpetuate-excuses-.pdf
Yount,
R. (2011, June 30). The Bell Curve and
Assigning Grades. Retrieved from: http://www.drrickyount.com/2011/06/jason-norris-and-the-bell-curve/
