Implementing Negotiable Grading Schemes

Article by Amy J. Kabrhel, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Chemistry & 2022-23 Instructional Development Consultant

For years I have seen students enter my courses on the first day of classes eager to engage with the course material who then slowly stop doing the homework but still perform well on the exams. I wondered if this was due to exhaustion, being overwhelmed with other demands on their time, or, frankly, just laziness. On the flip side, I have had students who rock it on the homework and fumble on the exams. I know they have learned the material being assessed but their ability to show me what they have learned via my exams is hindered. There are several reasons for this (undiagnosed learning disability, test anxiety, lack of sleep, etc.), but after 16 years of teaching in higher education, I have finally decided to make my course grading scheme more equitable for the wide variety of students I see in my courses. In Fall of 2022, I implemented a negotiable grading scheme in my CHEM 211 (Principles of Chemistry I) course as detailed below.

Negotiable Grading Scheme for CHEM 211
#1-Consistency Commander #2-Exam Rockstar #3-Quiz Master #4-Final Boss
Exams (4): 40% (10% each) 56% (14% each) 24% (6% each) 40% (10% each)
Final Exam: 15%

(equiv. to 1.5 exams)

21%

(equiv. to 1.5 exams)

9%

(equiv. to 1.5 exams)

25%

(equiv. to 2.5 exams)

Online Homework

(42-lowest 2 dropped):

20%

(0.5% each)

5%

(0.125% each)

40%

(1% each)

15%

(0.375% each)

Pre-Lecture Quizzes

(37-lowest 7 dropped):

10%

(~0.33% each)

3%

(0.1% each)

12%

(0.4% each)

5%

(~0.17% each)

Discussion (4 graded): 5% (1.25% per graded week)
Project: 10%

#1–Consistency Commander: Tends to maintain consistent and successful study/learning strategies across the semester, appreciates the use of homework and quizzes to regularly check in and keep motivation up.

#2–Exam Rockstar: Prefers to spend time studying for exams, does not place a high priority on weekly check-in assessments (homework and quizzes).

#3–Quiz Master: Places a high priority on weekly check-in assessments (homework and quizzes) to regularly keep up with the material, places a lower priority on exams.

#4–Final Boss: Prefers synthesizing knowledge across the term and proving their knowledge acquisition at the end of the semester on the cumulative Final Exam, places a lower priority on weekly check-in assessments.

In this negotiable grading system, students select the grading scheme that best matches their abilities, learning preferences, time constraints, and anxieties. On the first day of classes last fall, I introduced these grading schemes, described each in a bit more detail, and then asked each student to fill out a small sheet of scratch paper with their name and their preferred grading scheme. I made it clear that they were not locked into this scheme on Day 1 but that by reflecting on their choice at the beginning of the semester, they knew where to focus their efforts. After Exam 2 (approximately halfway through the semester), we revisited the grading schemes, and students locked in their scheme for the semester.

On Day 1, half of my students picked #1-Consistency Commander and the other half picked #3-Quiz Master. This did not surprise me since a large number of students have some form of test anxiety. However, after seeing their exam scores on Exams 1 & 2, which were quite good this fall, and seeing how a few of them had started not completing the homework and pre-lecture quizzes on time, a few students switched to #2-Exam Rockstar. After the Final Exam, I calculated each student’s final course grade in each grading scheme (easily done via Excel) and found that most students had picked the scheme that best matched their skills and learning preferences. A few, however, had a higher grade in a scheme different than the one they had selected. I discussed this with them (via email or in person) to help them reflect on their metacognition and to help them get a better sense of their strengths (and weaknesses) as a college student. They were very appreciative of this, and I believe this will help them realize where they may need to focus more of their attention in courses that do not use negotiable grading schemes.

This spring semester, I am using a similar negotiable grading scheme in my CHEM 212 (Principles of Chemistry II) course. Most of my CHEM 212 students took CHEM 211 with me last fall, so they were anticipating this grading system, and when I introduced it on Day 1, they were very thankful. Many of them stated that they wished more of their professors used this system, which is what prompted me to write this blog post. I think negotiable grading schemes are a wonderful way to make your course more accessible and equitable to our students who come from varying backgrounds with unique skill sets that speak to some assessment types more so than others. In addition, negotiable grading schemes give students agency in your course and a feeling that they have more control over their course grades. They can more easily balance their workload and put their efforts into the assessments that matter most to them. As you can see from my schemes presented above, all assignments are still included in each overall scheme; it is their weight that changes. In some cases (e.g., Discussion and Project for my course), the assessment is too important for it to have varying weight from scheme to scheme. This can express to students the value of certain assessments.

One minor drawback is that Canvas can only show one grading scheme. I chose #1-Consistency Commander for the scheme I put in my CHEM 211 Canvas page. This means students who chose a different grading scheme had to see me (or email me) to know what their current grade was on their chosen scheme. Thankfully, if you keep your Excel grade book up to date, this is not too difficult to communicate to those students.

Overall, I found this method of grading liberating for students and wonderful for student-instructor rapport. As mentioned, I am using this method in Spring 2023, and I plan to continue using this method in most of my courses from now on. If you have any questions for me about negotiable grading scheme, I would be more than happy to chat with you about them.

Events on AI, Machine-Generated Content, and ChatGPT (Feb. 10, Feb. 17, Mar. 24 & Apr. 7, 2023)

Have you heard the term “ChatGPT” and wondered what everyone was talking about? Are you thinking about how artificial intelligence and machine-generated content could help you as a teacher or complicate your ability to assess true student learning? Experts from across UW-Green Bay are coming together to help you! Please read on to learn more about the sessions being offered in Spring 2023.

ChatGPT Workshop (Feb. 10 & 17, 8 – 9:30 a.m.)

We are excited to announce that the Cofrin School of Business, with support from CATL, is hosting a workshop on ChatGPT! Come learn about ChatGPT by Open AI. Join CSB faculty in this interactive workshop to experience the most advanced chatbot and discuss implications for teaching and learning.

The workshop is moderated by Oliver Buechse, Executive in Residence, Cofrin School of Business. It will be offered on two different Fridays, Feb. 10 and 17, from 8 – 9:30 a.m. in the Willie D. Davis Finance and Investment Lab on the first floor of Wood Hall. The workshops are free and open to all UWGB employees.

If you need an accommodation for any of the sessions that are a part of the “ChaptGPT Workshop” please contact Kathryn Marten (martenk@uwgb.edu).

AI, Teaching, & Learning Series (Feb. 17, Mar. 24, & Apr. 7, 11:40 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.)

UW-Green Libraries, CATL, The Learning Center, and UWGB faculty are all coming together to offer a series of three workshops on machine-generated content applications and artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT and their potential impacts on teaching and learning. Participants will have the option to attend this series in-person or via Zoom. 

Teaching and Learning in the Time of ChatGPT | Friday, Feb. 17, 11:40 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

UW-Green Bay instructors with expertise in artificial intelligence and machine learning will introduce us to AI-content generating tools, like ChatGPT, and their potential uses and pitfalls. Join other instructors for an engaging discussion about the impact on teaching and learning and a brief opportunity to test the tools themselves. 

Writing Assignments and Artificial Intelligence | Friday, Mar. 24, 11:40 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

ChatGPT and other text-generating tools have raised concerns among instructors whose curriculum relies upon writing assignments from creative writing to lab reports and research papers. In this session, we’ll focus on the implications of these tools on writing and pedagogy, assessment, and curriculum design.  

Designing and Managing Authentic Assessments | Friday, Apr. 7, 11:40 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Students may inevitably use artificial intelligence and text-generating tools, but there are strategies instructors can explore and use to alleviate instructional stress around student learning. In this session, we will explore strategies for planning and developing authentic assessments to help students actively engage in their learning. This session will also offer instructors resources to help navigate the issues surrounding artificial intelligence and discuss ways to create assessments that embrace or acknowledge the use of AI and text-generating tools.

If you need an accommodation for any of the sessions that are a part of the “AI, Teaching & Learning Series,” please contact Kate Farley (farleyk@uwgb.edu).

OPID-Sponsored Systemwide Book Club: Relationship-Rich Education (Spring 2023)

The Office of Professional and Instructional Development (OPID) is sponsoring a systemwide book club for UW instructors this spring! Together we will be reading Relationship-Rich Education: How Human Connections Drive Success in College by Peter Felten (the plenary speaker for this year’s OPID spring conference) and Leo M. Lambert. All book club participants will receive a free physical copy of the book.

What single factor makes for an excellent college education? As it turns out, it's pretty simple: human relationships. Decades of research demonstrate the transformative potential and the lasting legacies of a relationship-rich college experience. Critics suggest that to build connections with peers, faculty, staff, and other mentors is expensive and only an option at elite institutions where instructors have the luxury of time with students. But in this revelatory book brimming with the voices of students, faculty, and staff from across the country, Peter Felten and Leo M. Lambert argue that relationship-rich environments can and should exist for all students at all types of institutions.

Drawing on nearly 400 interviews with students, faculty, and staff at 29 higher education institutions across the country, Relationship-Rich Education provides readers with practical advice on how they can develop and sustain powerful relationship-based learning in their own contexts. Ultimately, the book is an invitation—and a challenge—for faculty, administrators, and student life staff to move relationships from the periphery to the center of undergraduate education.

 

"Relationship-Rich Education" book jacket which depicts an aerial shot of people traversing across a concrete surface, connected by thin black lines

Registration is open through Friday, Feb. 10, but we encourage you to sign up early to guarantee your spot! UW-Green Bay has spots for ten participants which will be filled on a first-come, first-served basis. Multiple options for meeting dates and times are available and all groups will meet via Zoom during March and April for a total of three meetings. Groups are being facilitated by Teaching and Learning Center Directors from across the System, and your facilitator and group members are determined by your choice of meeting day and time, making this a great opportunity to meet instructors from different UW campuses.

Please contact CATL at CATL@uwgb.edu if you have any questions or OPID@uwsa.edu if you need an accommodation.

Call for 2023 OPID Spring Conference – The Joys of Teaching and Learning: Centering Students (Applications Due Monday, Jan. 9)

The UW System Office of Professional & Instructional Development (OPID) has announced the details for their annual spring conference on teaching and learning! The 2023 conference will be held in person in Madison and via Zoom on Apr. 20 & 21, 2023, and the theme for this year is “centering students.” OPID invites you to participate by submitting a proposal about your teaching and learning experiences, ideas, insights, questions, failures, and accomplishments. The call is open to all UW educators, and proposals are due Monday, Jan. 9, 2023.

Learn More & Apply

Theme

The Joys of Teaching & Learning: Centering Students

Description provided by the OPID 2023 Spring Conference on Teaching & Learning website.

From the classroom to department meetings and from learning management systems to addressing mental health and wellbeing, students are the focus of our professional lives. In the past few years, we have increased our attention to centering our teaching practices around the “whole student.” Re-examining assessment strategies, updating curriculum, exploring teaching methods and modalities while increasing flexibility and compassionate responses to students’ needs are just a few examples.

Centering Students is what we do as educators and is tied to our goals, challenges and the rewards of teaching and learning. As we deal with the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have an opportunity to explore what we have learned, and what we still need to learn, about connecting with and supporting students. How might we consider what we need in terms of self-care and care for colleagues so we can feel a sense of well-being and enable us to better care for others around us? How do we cultivate relationships and create a sense of community with our students? How do we bring student voices into our face-to-face, online, and blended learning environments? What opportunities are there to cultivate connections both within and external to our class environments? How can we meet students where they are, while advising and mentoring them to succeed beyond our learning contexts?

We invite you to contribute to the conversation about centering students by presenting at OPID’s 2023 Spring Conference. Please share your experiences, ideas, insights, questions, failures, and accomplishments so we can collaborate and learn together to explore possibilities for centering students in our teaching/learning contexts.

Read more about the theme and plenary speaker on the OPID 2023 Spring Conference on Teaching & Learning site!

Questions?

Programmatic inquiries may be directed to Fay Akindes, Director of Systemwide Professional and Instructional Development, UW System, fakindes@uwsa.edu, (608) 263-2684.

Evidence-Based Approaches to Promoting Academic Honesty

Academic honesty has always been a concern in higher education, but the proliferation of technology has changed the scope and nature of the problem. Students have access to more electronic means to cheat, including AI-generated papers and websites that provide access to test bank questions and answers. Meanwhile, professors can deploy competing technologies designed to search automatically for plagiarized content, lock down browsers during exams, or remotely proctor test-taking.

It should come as no surprise that there are ethical concerns about both academic dishonesty itself and the privacy and intellectual property issues raised by technologies intended to detect or prevent it. In fact, one Canadian professor recently taught an academic course on cheating, and he is a co-investigator on a large-scale study of college student motivations to pay others to do their work.

The SoTL literature on this topic often lags behind the technological advances, but there are some recent studies instructors may find helpful. Duncan and Joyner (2022) surveyed students and TAs about digital proctoring, and although their sample was not representative, their resulting article is definitely worth a read. They provide a nice overview of costs of benefits of the practice, and they also effectively summarize the literature on alternative assessment strategies faculty can employ. Another recent addition to the body of knowledge on academic honesty is a study of six relatively low-tech and brief methods to reduce cheating, such as allowing students to withdraw assignments. Again, there are some methodological issues with the research, but instructors may find the techniques and review of past research on them illuminating.

The issue of academic integrity is complex, multi-faceted, and rapidly evolving given its intersection with emerging technology. Additional examples of relevant SoTL research on the topic are included below. CATL will update this list as we are able. Feel free to contact us with suggested resources as well.

Additional Resources