Who's tried Ungrading in STEM courses?

[vela]

I could get away with a single exam but there is no testing center to send them to where I can ensure that they can't cheat.

I take it your courses will be taught remotely. My colleagues often complained about obvious signs of cheating on exams, like using weird ass notation. I had some students who copied stray marks that were on the solution they found online because they clearly didn't understand the solution. One thing you can do is make students write explanations on exams, so even if they find a solution online, it's useless unless they understand what's going on.

I'm happy to be back in the classroom this semester, and so are the students for the most part. The remote classes definitely took a toll on some students. I'm teaching the second semester of intro physics, but I noticed some students really don't know what it takes to succeed in a physics course. Some don't attend regularly (and miss the labs as a result); some don't do much of the homework; etc.

 

[vela]

I saw the result many years ago in interviewing EE candidates. It was pretty common for people to have taken classes and have no idea how to do the basic stuff they said they could, that should have been easy. I had zero interest in their grades, that meant nothing compared to asking for solutions to problems.

This gets to the idea underlying ungrading.

The traditional idea behind grades is that students who learn the material well will do well on assignments and exams, which will be reflected in their grade for a course. But there are a lot of students who suck at learning, so the emphasis on earning points/grades incentivizes cheating and other bad behaviors over learning. If a student happens to learn something along the way, great. But getting 100% on the exam turns out to be the main goal, not understanding the material.

I imagine the way the system is supposed to work is in fact how it worked out for many of us here. So we have the mindset that since the system worked for us, we're just going to stick with it, despite obvious signs it doesn't work for many students. The goal of ungrading is to set up a course so that learning, rather than earning points, becomes the main focus for students.

 

[symbolipoint]

I saw the result many years ago in interviewing EE candidates. It was pretty common for people to have taken classes and have no idea how to do the basic stuff they said they could, that should have been easy. I had zero interest in their grades, that meant nothing compared to asking for solutions to problems. I didn't care how or where they learned the material. Grad school is also a place where knowledge has to actually be applied, not just collected on a transcript.

That reminds us of why good interviewers for scientific or engineering position candidates ask basic applied questions, such as mostly involving basic arithmetic and basic algebra, including for some simple applications directly related to the job to be filled. The competent candidates will logically pull their way through the problem; and the incompetent candidates will not due to not having the concepts or to not having the academic skills. But OF COURSE, this does not account for social inter-network connections.

 

[anorlunda]

Allow me to reminisce about the old days. When I went to college, we had an enforced policy that C must be average. Actually the mean, with half above and half below. That means the average GPA was 2.0 by definition. Flunk out was 1.85.

We lost half the students each semester. We started with 340 freshmen EEs and graduated 30. Nobody ever asked about rank in class.

On the other hand, tuition my freshman year was only $300, and by senior year $600. Admission was lax by today's standard. It was an egalitarian system that granted admission to a large number of candidates, but graduated only the worthy. Many flunk outs were able to get degrees in less demanding fields in less demanding colleges. They could transfer credits for the courses they did pass. In that way, those who flunked out did not lose a fortune. The phrase for that is, "Reach for the brass ring."

p.s. It was the Vietnam War that changed everything. Suddenly, a grade less than B was seen as a death sentence. The flunk rate dropped drastically. After the war, it never reverted to the previous state.

 

[DaveE]

an enforced policy that C must be average

Oh, so you didn't go to Stanford then...

 

[swampwiz]

It's hard to imagine 1/3 of grad students failing a course.

It's not so hard when the course is Theory of Elastic Stability.

 

[gleem]

It's not so hard when the course is Theory of Elastic Stability.

My point was that most of those people should not have been admitted to the graduate program.

 

[swampwiz]

Allow me to reminisce about the old days. When I went to college, we had an enforced policy that C must be average. Actually the mean, with half above and half below. That means the average GPA was 2.0 by definition. Flunk out was 1.85.

We lost half the students each semester. We started with 340 freshmen EEs and graduated 30. Nobody ever asked about rank in class.

p.s. It was the Vietnam War that changed everything. Suddenly, a grade less than B was seen as a death sentence. The flunk rate dropped drastically. After the war, it never reverted to the previous state.

Perhaps it was like this?

 

[Dr Transport]

Dr. Transport, gmax137, gleem, others,
about all the cheating and the remedies you have been trying, what more can you do? What else are you ALLOWED to do?

I've asked for the largest lecture halls on campus, that way I can get away with one version of the exam and spread them out so that they can't cheat. Right now I am in a classroom that has about 5 chairs empty, so spreading them out isn't an option.

We are not a big university, nor a major research university, so we don't have the amenities that others have. I'm really only on campus for about 8 hours a week, so taking time to do other approaches isn't viable.

Part of the cheating is cultural, they feel honored to have someone view their work as good and want to copy it. The other side of this, is that they feel the obligation to help each other out, again it is a cultural thing. In the US, we are brought up to help, but it is every man for himself, which is not how they were raised.

I had three of my students who got a zero for copying beg me for a makeup exam, I gave in, but it was extremely difficult and I'm going to be a bastard grading it, they won't get better than an 50%. When they came to take it, I locked up their bags and phones in my lab store room and put them in three different rooms and told them explicitly that if I saw any evidence of cheating this time, zeros would be given again and they'd flunk my course, period. Come back next semester, buy the new text and try again.

As for what else I can do, I don't know.

 

[anorlunda]

Part of the cheating is cultural

It is also cultural to not "rat" on friends or family. I think it is strange how some social instincts are actually antisocial in effect.

 

[Dr Transport]

I take it your courses will be taught remotely.

Nope, all in person. That is how rampant and blatant it is. These people are pros at it, they've copied off of others for their entire careers.

 

[gleem]

Will this be the great imposter generation?

 

[Cave Diver]

I'm curious if anyone has tried "ungrading" in their STEM courses and if so, how it worked out. The idea is to get away from the using points to determine a student's grade and use different types of assessment that better motivate students to learn.

https://www.jessestommel.com/why-i-dont-grade/

https://www.chemedx.org/blog/ungrading-what-it-and-why-should-we-use-it

My interest arises from my experiences since classes went remote because of the pandemic. Like many other instructors, I saw the mysterious increase in performance by many students on exams (as well as obvious signs of cheating in some cases). To reduce the incentive to cheat, I replaced most of these high-stakes assignments with low-stakes weekly problems, where students had to write up a solution where they had to identify the relevant physical concepts, explain their problem-solving strategy, and finally solve the problem. It wasn't enough to just write down a bunch of math, which they could easily find on Chegg or somewhere else on the internet; they actually had to articulate the reasoning involved. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the write-ups from some of my students.

There were some problems, however. The main thing was assessment. I developed a rubric, but then it would sometimes end up resulting in a grade I didn't feel accurately reflected the quality of the work. Over time, I've modified the rubric, but I've never been happy with the results. This semester, I'm considering just giving them scores of "satisfactory," "needs revision," and "not submitted," and record audio feedback on what I thought they did well, what could use improvement, etc. I'm still thinking about how to translate these results into a letter grade that I have to assign at the end of the semester.

Anyway, I would love to hear any comments or idea, tips, and about anyone's (student or faculty) experiences with these types of assessments.

Mr. Kohn talks nicely but lives in lalaland. If his theories mattered then grades would be a thing of the past. We need proctored tests and grades to know how well students know the material. We also need them so that students get stressed out, do their best, and become better people through developing mechanisms of coping with life, pressure, competition, and having to find ways to do things they hate. You take a wrong turn and you are dead. This is how life is. It's OK for students to take a test and a grade. They will become far more traumatized if they go out there like a bunch of entitled weaklings. That's hard to hear but it shouldn't be. This is how the world has been spinning since prehistory. It won't change for you or me the last 20 years just because we've been pressing buttons on a screen. Why is it so hard to understand the obvious? It's interesting that people with PhDs are capable of confusing reality with wishful thinking to such an extent, or worse, knowingly lie with a straight face. It is equally interesting that other people take them seriously and even more interesting that it is nearly impossible to find any articles criticizing 'ungrading' for what it is: a dishonest and hypocritical device.

 

[symbolipoint]

Some training systems use a chart of objectives. The person who trains the learner makes a mark to affirm that a specific objective is satisfied. The objectives might or might not be met in any decided sequence. Only important is at some point in the training or during an assessing period, every objective is met. The training administrators could choose to apply a scoring system, or not, depending on how important a scoring system is for the training/learning to be done.

 

[anorlunda]

We need proctored tests and grades to know how well students know the material. We also need them so that students get stressed out, do their best, and become better people through developing mechanisms of coping with life, pressure, competition, and having to find ways to do things they hate.

Bravo. Well said.

Future employers also need confidence that graduates have the knowledge needed to do the jobs and that they have performed well under pressure. A grade transcript provides useful clues.

 

[PeroK]

Mr. Kohn talks nicely but lives in lalaland. If his theories mattered then grades would be a thing of the past. We need proctored tests and grades to know how well students know the material. We also need them so that students get stressed out, do their best, and become better people through developing mechanisms of coping with life, pressure, competition, and having to find ways to do things they hate. You take a wrong turn and you are dead. This is how life is. It's OK for students to take a test and a grade. They will become far more traumatized if they go out there like a bunch of entitled weaklings. That's hard to hear but it shouldn't be. This is how the world has been spinning since prehistory. It won't change for you or me the last 20 years just because we've been pressing buttons on a screen. Why is it so hard to understand the obvious? It's interesting that people with PhDs are capable of confusing reality with wishful thinking to such an extent, or worse, knowingly lie with a straight face. It is equally interesting that other people take them seriously and even more interesting that it is nearly impossible to find any articles criticizing 'ungrading' for what it is: a dishonest and hypocritical device.

I don't agree with this. Knowledge of a subject can be separated from working under pressure. A good tennis coach, for example would assess a player's ability and their mental strength separately.

Also, I had someone working for me who was technically very sound (IT) but flaky under pressure. So, I got him to do what he was good at: writing and testing scripts. But, I wouldn't have asked him to work a weekend on his own.

Your attitude is too all or nothing for me. We ought to make the working environment more inclusive and try to exploit the strengths people have. Not throw people on the scrapheap because they have a weakness.

 

[DaveE]

A grade transcript provides useful clues.

When I was hiring EEs, I never asked for transcripts. I just didn't care what grade they got in physics. I asked questions; my own impromptu oral exam. No one ever asked for my transcripts either. But solving problems for people is a constant activity. Honestly, I don't know how to compare an A- from Texas Tech to a B- from MIT. Grading just isn't consistent enough to mean much outside of a single institution (maybe inside too).

 

[anorlunda]

When I was hiring EEs, I never asked for transcripts.

It varied by decade. When grade inflation was rampant, grades became useless. Before the Vietnam War, successful graduation was sufficient evidence. In many cases, the recommendation from a known professor was better than grades. In others, yes you're right interview questions.

Our biggest complaint was that engineering students were deficient in writing and language skills. A consulting company's major products were reports and presentations.

 

[gleem]

Do I/we really need to see the rest of the video?

Let's be open-minded now.

I read the article by Kohn reference by @vela "The Case Against Grades" which elaborate on his ideas and gives examples of their success(?), Have any scientific studies (think double-blind) been conducted comparing ungrading programs to grading programs, and the effect on students' future success? Kohn is down on grading in elementary and high school but doesn't say much about college. For schools that ungrade, he states

Moreover, these schools point out that their students are often more motivated and proficient learners, thus better prepared for college, than their counterparts at traditional schools who have been preoccupied with grades.

"Often more motivated and proficient learners" By not quantifying this statement what do we take it to mean in support of his thesis? He also does not give much advice as to how assessments are to be made except you dare not use numbers.

Something happened during the '60s and '70s. I met one of my ug physics profs several years after graduating, and he commented that students were less hard-working.

Regarding grades reducing the incentive to learn was not my experience. As far as driving students to cheat can we blame increased research misconduct on grading? Some of these students became parents who in recent years tried to bribe university officials to assist in the admission of their children to university. Did their grades make them do it?

Maybe we parents must shoulder some blame for promising too much and not being realistic.

 

[Cave Diver]

I don't agree with this. Knowledge of a subject can be separated from working under pressure. A good tennis coach, for example would assess a player's ability and their mental strength separately.

Also, I had someone working for me who was technically very sound (IT) but flaky under pressure. So, I got him to do what he was good at: writing and testing scripts. But, I wouldn't have asked him to work a weekend on his own.

Your attitude is too all or nothing for me. We ought to make the working environment more inclusive and try to exploit the strengths people have. Not throw people on the scrapheap because they have a weakness.

I don't think that you disagree with anything I actually said. I am not talking about stringent time limits or cut-throat oral examinations, or even interviews for jobs ... (right?) I am talking about fully-proctored, in-class tests with very liberal time limits ... Is this attitude all or nothing for you?

My recommendation letters, and I have written hundreds of them, mean a ton and my grades mean a ton and I make sure I let graduate schools and employers know with great success as you may imagine. Unfortunately, the grades of many of my colleagues mean nothing. That is the truth. They needed to get tenured, promoted, or accepted by students, colleagues, and the community.

 

[Cave Diver]

When I was hiring EEs, I never asked for transcripts. I just didn't care what grade they got in physics. I asked questions; my own impromptu oral exam. No one ever asked for my transcripts either. But solving problems for people is a constant activity. Honestly, I don't know how to compare an A- from Texas Tech to a B- from MIT. Grading just isn't consistent enough to mean much outside of a single institution (maybe inside too).

Any mentally stable MIT student with As in physics, just hire the kid. Let's keep it real, please. Swarthmore? Same thing. Unfortunately that does not solve the problem you describe. Grades mean very little in general. Many As are actually Cs, not Bs. Recommendation letters that strongly interpret grades for you may be of great help. I always do that in my letters.

 

[Cave Diver]

Some training systems use a chart of objectives. The person who trains the learner makes a mark to affirm that a specific objective is satisfied. The objectives might or might not be met in any decided sequence. Only important is at some point in the training or during an assessing period, every objective is met. The training administrators could choose to apply a scoring system, or not, depending on how important a scoring system is for the training/learning to be done.

Yes, apply this in a quantum mechanics class, or statistical mechanics, or optics, or electromagnetic theory, or mechanics of materials, or thermodynamics. Break those subjects down to specific "objectives" and assess those on a rolling basis throughout the semester and make it fair so that students do not copy from each other or other sources and truly demonstrate mastery over the semester. Of course, you can do it. If there is no limit to how low you are prepared to place the bar, that is ...

 

[Cave Diver]

Let's be open-minded now.

I read the article by Kohn reference by @vela "The Case Against Grades" which elaborate on his ideas and gives examples of their success(?), Have any scientific studies (think double-blind) been conducted comparing ungrading programs to grading programs, and the effect on students' future success? Kohn is down on grading in elementary and high school but doesn't say much about college. For schools that ungrade, he states

"Often more motivated and proficient learners" By not quantifying this statement what do we take it to mean in support of his thesis? He also does not give much advice as to how assessments are to be made except you dare not use numbers.

Something happened during the '60s and '70s. I met one of my ug physics profs several years after graduating, and he commented that students were less hard-working.

Regarding grades reducing the incentive to learn was not my experience. As far as driving students to cheat can we blame increased research misconduct on grading? Some of these students became parents who in recent years tried to bribe university officials to assist in the admission of their children to university. Did their grades make them do it?

Maybe we parents must shoulder some blame for promising too much and not being realistic.

Education is a product. If you wish to increase sales you lower the price, that is, grades are inflated. Health is a product. The most critical one. That is why you are paying an arm and a leg in US ...

It's all about business and the economy and how they evolve over time based on technology. Socio-cultural and political changes are seated on this basis and are of secondary importance in understanding the changes we are discussing, I think. This of course assumes that fundamental human nature does not change much in a couple of millennia or so, which we know is the case.

That is why it is utterly futile to try to resist the trends. But that does not mean that we need to suspend critical thinking. If you must put food on the table, go ahead and un-grade. But this "holy indignation" against grades is not funny ... As I implied before, I am not sure what is more scary, the blatant lie (research shows ... sure it does!), or the feeling that perhaps the un-grading zealots actually believe in what they preach. (A clarification: Of course, there are "fun courses" that can do fine without grades and amazing students who need no grades. The understanding is that we are not discussing these special cases.)

 

[gleem]

Education is a product.

Yes, I think this is true. But at one time it was a service that was sought and students were clients, not customers.

 

[anorlunda]

What happened in 1967 was twofold.

1. The selective service draft exemption had been offered to students. But the Vietnam War caused pressure. Draft exemptions were offered only to students with 3.0 or better. On campus that was translated to mean a grade C or lower was a death penalty.
2. The baby boomer generation took over from the lost generation. Their numbers, their outlook their behaviors and their entitlement were different to say the least.

 

[gleem]

On campus that was translated to mean a grade C or lower was a death penalty.

Draft exemption mostly meant that your life will not be interrupted. It wasn't exactly a death sentence although some probably thought it was, with 2.7 M serving and 58 K dying. I know, for those killed it was.

The baby boomer generation took over from the lost generation. Their numbers, their outlook their behaviors and their entitlement were different to say the least.

Actually, it was the greatest generation, 1901 -1927 that spawned the baby boomers. Sandwiched between them was the silent generation that suffered during the depression and WWII and benefited from the economic expansion that occurred in the '50s and '60s. We also suffered (and benefited from the IIs classification) through the Vietnam war and don't forget the Korean war. The way I see it the late boomers and X generation are the ones that really started to exhibit a more me attitude. Anyway, it's complicated.

 

[JLowe]

I don't agree with this. Knowledge of a subject can be separated from working under pressure. A good tennis coach, for example would assess a player's ability and their mental strength separately.

Also, I had someone working for me who was technically very sound (IT) but flaky under pressure. So, I got him to do what he was good at: writing and testing scripts. But, I wouldn't have asked him to work a weekend on his own.

Your attitude is too all or nothing for me. We ought to make the working environment more inclusive and try to exploit the strengths people have. Not throw people on the scrapheap because they have a weakness.

This reminds me of a discussion I had about public speaking, and being required in school. No job I've ever had has chosen the bad public speakers to do the public speaking. In the workforce, people are naturally assigned tasks based on strengths and weaknesses, because this is the best way to get the job done and make money.

 

[berkeman]

This reminds me of a discussion I had about public speaking, and being required in school. No job I've ever had has chosen the bad public speakers to do the public speaking.

I'm not sure I understand your point, but public speaking is definitely a skill that can be learned and improved upon. Even if in the end the student still is not great at public speaking, they are likely better at it due to the instruction (assuming a good and patient teacher). I learned a huge amount from such classes and from taking part in speech competitions, and it has served me very well over the years. My father was a member of Toastmasters as well, which was part of my motivation to take the classes in high school and get more comfortable speaking in front of large groups.

 

[JLowe]

I'm not sure I understand your point, but public speaking is definitely a skill that can be learned and improved upon. Even if in the end the student still is not great at public speaking, they are likely better at it due to the instruction (assuming a good and patient teacher). I learned a huge amount from such classes and from taking part in speech competitions, and it has served me very well over the years. My father was a member of Toastmasters as well, which was part of my motivation to take the classes in high school and get more comfortable speaking in front of large groups.

I'm not saying it's a skill that can't be learned, I'm saying that its rare people that aren't good at it are gonna have to do it at their job.

 

[berkeman]

I'm not saying it's a skill that can't be learned, I'm saying that its rare people that aren't good at it are gonna have to do it at their job.

https://www.toastmasters.org/

 

[hutchphd]

This is why good teaching requires good teachers. It is not a one size fits all proposition and god save us from the monolith.

I had several excellent teachers in High School. None of them taught me science. The one who really did me the most lasting good was my award- winning choir director. I was perfectly happy singing bass baritone in an extraordinary choir (better than subsequent Cornell Glee club) but Mr Baber let it be known to me during my junior year that he had decided I should be the lead in the senior musical a year hence. I had never sought the limelight, and there was no planet upon which I wanted to to do that, but there was no way I would let him down. What a gift he gave me.

I believe the education I received in Ohio public schools in the 1960's using the "old" paradigm served me well. Of course I was (maybe upper) middle class and white and had extraordinary parents of bone fide american purity to back before the revolution. But it did work well for me.

The answer as I see it is simple but not easy. Hire talented teachers. Pay them well. Treat them with dignity. Constrain them lightly.

EDIT: It has been pointed out to me (thanks @berkeman ) that this could be interpreted other than as intended. I am not at all pleased that there was and is rascism and xenophobia everywhere in a US society and it was worse in my youth. I was simply supplying "truth in advertising" that I had a particularly privileged childhood because of societal norms . Would that everyone could say the same and enjoy those benefits

 

[BillTre]

I think an important aspect of public speaking include confidence in front of crowds and confidence in your subject.
I had rather severe stage fright when I was young, but I took a HS class where the main thing was to get people to embarrass themselves in front of the class.
Since nothing bad happened, this lead to the extinction of that emotional response.
I am now pretty fearless in front of crowds.
I also use an attitude that on the subject I am talking about, I know more than the audience and they want to hear what I have to say.
The rest is talk organization which I think is pretty straightforward.

I think being able to confidently speaking in front of people is a benefit for many careers.