Our first class in EDEA 662 and
this week’s reading in Tagg have left me with two main
questions. The first pertains to our decision whether or not to receive a group
grade as opposed to individual grades, and the second relates to the
applicability of Tagg’s argument for institutional transformation.
First, I'll discuss our decision to receive a
group grade. When Chris gave us the option of
receiving a group grade, I was initially very excited about the prospect. A
group grade would force us to be inclusive and encourage us to work together and
support each other more than we might usually. However, as the
discussion turned to grades, I realized that a group grade would force me to be
more concerned about grades than I usually am. I think this is an unusual
perspective and may come from my being a non-traditional student. The last time
I worried about grades was in 1996 when I finished my Master’s degree. After
teaching for 10 years, I decided to come back to the US and pursue a PhD, so as
to be able to develop needed skills and better address problems that I found
frustrating in my work. I first enrolled in a program in Massachusetts where I received
an AGC. The classes in that program were graded on a pass/fail basis precisely
for the reason that they wanted you to focus on learning rather than grades.
This was fine with me, and I found that it really helped me think about what I
wanted to get out of the classes and where I wanted to focus my time. Also, the
work load was such that it was impossible to do all things in all classes at
100%, and you learned to pick and choose what was important to you. When I came
to UH a few years ago, I carried that attitude with me and although my
coursework here required grades, I rarely paid attention to them. For the past
year I have been enrolled in 699s, also graded on a credit/no credit basis.
When we started class on Monday, I
thought that I would approach the class in the same way I have others, focusing
on what most addressed my needs and interests and what would most help me make
progress on my dissertation. However, about half way through our discussion on
the group grade, I realized that if we chose the group grade, I would now be
responsible for everyone else’s grade and with that responsibility, would have
to take into account about how my choices and work affected the class grade - no
longer could I just focus on what I thought was useful to me. I still voted for
the group grade option because I think it is a great opportunity to see how
this kind of class structure affects classroom dynamics. I also see that it is
a great way to encourage students to work harder as they have a sense of
responsibility to others. However, I’m still not sure how it is meant to make
us more learning oriented rather than grade oriented. Perhaps creating the
rubric will be the key to that aspect of the experiment. I will be interested
to see how this plays out and how it affects our attitudes toward grades and
learning.
Second, I found Tagg’s first nine
chapters interesting and refreshing, however his discussion regarding the need
for institutional transformation rather than small scale innovations and curriculum
plugs has left me wondering to what extent I can realistically apply some of
the ideas in this book. I work in ESL, and ESL programs are often “service
programs,” they are usually marginalized and have a low status among programs
on campus, and they must meet the (often unrealistic) demands of many masters
as our students come from all departments. ESL faculty are rarely given a voice in
institutional planning, so while I agree with the idea that we need
institutional transformation rather than a patchwork of innovations, I’m not
sure how someone like me will have the opportunity to affect this kind of
change. I hope this will be addressed in the book and classroom discussions,
and I welcome everyone else’s ideas on this.
Hi Bonnie,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your experience with the pass/fail courses. I remember when I first came to UHM, I thought students would be interested in the credit/no credit option because, not for your reason of focusing on learning, but to hide grades, as a "pass" was equivalent to a C-grade or higher. From the UHM Catalog: "The credit/no credit option encourages students to broaden their education by venturing into subjects outside their fields of specialization without risking a relatively low grade. The CR designation denotes C (not C-) caliber work or better. However, students should be aware that some colleges and many graduate and professional schools evaluate CR as C and NC as F. The same is true of some employers and scholarship awarding agencies." I later learned that credit/no credit did not necessarily work in student's favor due to the heavy reliance on letter grade reporting.
As for Tagg, I think if the institution can agree on a unified vision for improvement, then that is better than the "patchwork of innovations" that may or may not work cohesively across departments in the end. However, I have also noticed that, in general, mandates are disliked. Thus, all parties must be introduced and trained in the new vision instead of the higher-ups saying, "Here it is, do this." In the absence of a formal, university-wide initiative, I think all we can do is implement what we can where we have influence. Small steps.