So I've got myself in a pickle. I've adopted the "You can't revise something you didn't originally attempt policy" (I use EMRF) for revising exam assessment, even to the point of not allowing it for multipart problems. Calc I problem, identify the zeros, critical points, inflection points, intervals where pos/neg, intervals where incr/decr, intervals where concave up/down. An E required getting all 6 parts correct. An M required 3 exactly correct and 2 others not necessarily correct, but with a lot of good work. R was two correct with a third partially correct. My thinking was students would work all parts and I would mark based on what they accomplished. Well, several students only answered three parts (usually correct or mostly correct). So, it's an R. But they didn't even attempt the other parts (the intervals in all cases). So, even though I told them the could revise it, they didn't do enough work to actually have anything to revise. One student has (rightfully) called me out on it. So, I'm kinda stuck. Any suggestions?

Inspired by/based on +Kate Owens' awesome SBSG FAQ she posted last week, I made up my own that I will use with my Discrete Structures classes this semester. It's a bit different than Kate's because my syllabus covers some of the details. I'll try to post that syllabus later. 

Post has attachment

Hi everyone. I'm so glad to have found this group. I tried SBSG after reading Linda Nilson's book last summer. I teach humanities and other things in the Honors College at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana. I posted a comment about this issue elsewhere, but I want to bring it up here: In the humanities, when pushing students to do analytical essays where there is no one right answer and where we want to assess quality and originality of ideas not just quality of expression or mastery of course ideas (great as those things are!), I'd be interested to hear anyone's suggestions for setting a clear specification on what "exceeds expectations" looks like for assignments like these.

Post has attachment
New post on ProfHacker this morning about specs grading. I left a comment alerting readers to the existence of this community and therefore to the existence of other people who are using SBSG. Hopefully connections will be made. 

Post has attachment
New blog post on specs grading/SBG using the EMRF rubric in my math courses. TLDR: The EMRF rubric is pretty frakking great. 

Post has attachment
Inspired by +Kate Owens' questions about the EMRF rubric, I wrote a blog post about how I am using it. Part 1 is the setup and how the outcomes of EMRF play into the letter grade assignment scheme. Part 2 later this week will have some examples.

FRIENDLY REMINDER: If you haven't visited my blog in a while, you're likely to get a Bluehost generic page thanks to some DNS issues I had. Just refresh the page or clear the cache or both. 

I'm giving my first midterm exam in my SBG "College Algebra" course tomorrow. The exam covers six standards, ranging from things like "Geometry Essentials" (like being able to use the formula for the area of a circle) to "Factoring Essentials" (like being able to factor a quadratic polynomial). The exam contains 14 questions which are not equally distributed among the six standards. I'll rank performance each standard as either "Proficient" or "Not Proficient" and allow students to improve standing through re-assessments.

Hoping to keep everyone posted on how this goes & about what's working and what isn't! So stay tuned...

How are most folks doing "homework"/outside of class practice?  So far I've just included a specification for "Complete X% of homework problems", but I'm not convinced that it's providing any useful information for computing a semester grade.  Most of the students need to practice, and that's the simplest method of "encouragement" I know of, but likely not the best.  Any other suggestions/practices that have worked well for you?

Post has attachment
So in between the grading to finish out this semester I have been working on next semester's courses. I'm teaching Discrete Structures 2 again. This semester I really struggled with my specs grading system because it was really too complicated and fussy, and I've been determined to make it cleaner, simpler, and more transparent. I'd like to share the beta version of it with you now. My original intent was for the whole grading system to take up 1/2 to 3/4 of a page, max -- that turned out to be impossible because of the grading table alone. But I have it down to 2.5 pages total which is a major improvement. Please let me know what you think, or if I can add context. 
Wait while more posts are being loaded