8.3 Course Hardness - Marking

This note discusses how a course is graded and the standards, expectations set by the instructor. This is one view of difficulty. Another view of difficulty is the amount of effort required by a student and this is dealt with in another note.



They are somewhat related because in theory, courses should be designed such that an average student can get an average mark with the average amount of effort and skill. The average mark is a bit tricky, but based on our experience, it is relatively common for instructors to talk what an average mark is; given their subject, level of course, and so forth.

In any event, in this note, we will focus on grading.

Observations...

• Low student performance can come from the failure to teach (on the part of the instructor) and/or from the failure to learn (the student). It is important to figure out what is going on if students are not achieving expected results.
• With a large enough sample, grading should be set to allow 10-15% of the students to excel, be the A's; assuming that there are no unusual reasons for skewing related to skill and expertise (e.g., selective enrollment by students based on GPA).
• There are some students, for whatever reason you are not going to be able to reach, and it isn't for lack of trying and it isn't for lack of skills on the side of the instructor.
• Teaching is a relationship that involves both teacher and learner.
• It is hard to know when you have succeeded at teaching because some of this is out of the hands of the instructor.
• One thing that falls under 'failing to teach' aspect is claiming that you have set a "high standard" and then bragging about how few achieve that standard. With a smile, gloating. That is pretty much the opposite of good teaching. It isn't necessarily an indication that you are a good teacher with rigorous standards.
• We think high standards are a good thing. That is not the issue. We should not be getting high pass rates by dumbing down what students do. However, once that standard is set, one's job as teacher is to best prepare one's students to meet or exceed that standard.

• We do not think a good teacher is one that sits back and just lets students fail at something and then be proud of the result. If most of one's students are not meeting expectations, it is time to rethink one's approach to teaching and try and find a way so that students are able to develop the skills to meet expectations, giving them both the opportunity and the support to do so.
• Low marks are a symptom; they are not the problem for the instructor to address.
• We have listened to instructors brag that they have never given a 100 in their class. If a student is significantly better than the other students, should not that be worthy of a perfect?
• It is possible to have a strange and odd group of students occasionally that break the mold. However, in general, it is not reasonable to assume that all students, every year, year in, year out, are not up to the task. If you have consistently low scores, a proper cause and effect analysis is warranted. Similarly, if marks are unusually high, an analysis is also required. It is unlikely that classes will consistently get 90+% every year; if so, the standards might be a bit off.
• From Inclusivity, Marginalization, Fairness, Equity, Equality of Students: ... equality implies that the course grading and assessments be designed that for the most part, all students have an equal starting point in the course and that the instructor is assessing what was taught in the course or explicitly linked to a previous course. This is the equal starting point. Marks are not given for skill and expertise not associated with the course. This gives everyone an equal chance to demonstrate their learning. Equity implies that we support and facilitate the opportunity for students to reach the point of demonstrating mastery in different ways; one size does not fit all. For example, memorization should not be the only way mastery is verified.

Further reading

• Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process, Studies in Higher Education, 31, 2, pp. 219-233,