I like a lot of things about Davidson's idea of grading. I like making the student responsible. I like using her course as a practice ground of sorts for evaluating and judging discourse, as students will have to do for the rest of their lives. I like that the one doing the evaluating one week will be evaluated the next, which does diminish one of my concerns somewhat. And I definitely like blogging for class, since this semester has given us all a unique way to share our thoughts and see what everyone else is thinking.
My concern is that the grading could get vindictive, or-- as one commenter described-- that classmates might gang together in Survivor-type alliances to ensure good grades for members of the group, whether warranted or not. While the provision that revising earns full marks helps to alleviate this, the possibility that someone will be hurt by a classmate's needlessly-harsh comments still worries me. Learning to take criticism is important, but I don't see how conversation and mutual respect could be fostered in an environment where some students are being harsh.
The expertise of the reviewer also comes into play here. As much as I like and appreciate the peer review process, it tends to result in divergently different feedback. I see the benefit in having to evaluate the feedback. However, when it comes to peers who have similar levels of familiarity with the subject, the possibility arises that a reviewer will give bad advice that the writer will then accept, with the net result that the writer's finished product is actually worse than the original.
So, in theory, a lot of things are good about the idea. In practice, I would be really uncomfortable with it.
Well, grading effects people in various manners!! It can be productive in the sense, make the students learn a thing or two and yet be quite stressful!!
ReplyDeletewith warm regards
CatchyTips for Writers
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAh... so we're praising the practicality of the UWC's non-evaluative method are we? You have been trained well... all thanks to my excellent guidance of course... haha just kidding....
ReplyDeleteI understand your concerns about the possibility of a needlessly harsh comment. But what if one of the criteria for crowdsourcing grading was the ability to deliver constructive feedback? This is a vital communication skill that carries across all occupations and life scenarios. And what better time than college to develop this?
Blogger ate my answer. >.<
ReplyDeleteHere's the gist: Yes, those skills need to be learned. But I'm worried about any useless/bad comments that may come before the skill arrives. So I guess if there were a class session or two devoted to teaching people how to give good feedback, plus a grade FOR the feedback (to prevent jerkiness), then I might be more open to the idea.
Interestingly, I highlighted the opposite concern in my post on this topic. I feel like the majority of students would err on the side of being too nice if given the power to assign grades... although I definitely agree that there would be some who would abuse that power in the fashion you describe if allowed. Either way, the problem seems to be that many students don't have a very good feel for what counts as useful or constructive criticism. Practice helps a lot, and that's what I like so much about Davidson's system... it makes criticism, evaluation, and writing equal partners in the learning. I personally am one who errs on the side of being too nice, but after taking lots of rhetoric classes and getting lots of practice responding to my peers' work, I feel I am now better at offering constructive criticism that is neither overly harsh nor overly deferential. I can't see a class like Davidson's getting off to a super smooth start, but I can definitely see things getting better as the students get more and more practice and start figuring out what it is they value in a good piece of feedback.
ReplyDeleteUntil reading your post, I never considered the idea that peer-to-peer grading may turn into something vindictive. I think this is a good point. However, with you comment considered, I feel that peer-to-peer grading could teach students fairness and how to handle/ conduct themselves when put in an authority position. They learn to understand what it is like to be in a position of power and what it is like to be the person without the power.
ReplyDeleteI guess I would be more comfortable with it if it were hedged round. I just get too many uneven peer reviews to be willing to put all my trust into that system.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason for my skepticism is that I'm in a UGS with a TA from a non-writing field, and her comments on my papers are incomprehensible. And she's TA'd this class before-- I'd hate to see what it was like the first time around. So I'm not convinced by this one instructor's success that this is the best idea.
On the other hand, I want it to be a good idea. I want it to work. And in some classes, I think it would, but the circumstances would have to be really, really good for that to happen-- including all the students being willing to work together and put in the same level of effort.
I just can't get into the idea of crowdsourcing grading. While it sounds like a great exercise in making students accountable, students who have dealt with having to evaluate your peers after a group project know that some students can be malicious and some can be really lazy. I have found myself angered at both students giving everyone in the group the same evaluation and at the thought that a specific group member intended to make the rest of the group look bad for personal gain. As someone who's always been concerned about grades, the idea that a whole class could be left to this sort of system just seems sort of wrong.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Megan that crowdsourcing grading could be a great opportunity for students to learn how to handle themselves when they are given power, especially over their peers. Sure, they may be tempted at first to be petty or overly lenient, but that can be easily modified by having some degree of minimal moderation by the teacher or a TA. Getting told off once should be enough for college students to learn their lesson and move on, and I feel like students could really benefit from a system in which they are given the power.
ReplyDelete