Grading the Group
This article is part six of a series on assessment. Click here to read the intro article, the second article, the third, the fourth and the fifth.
One of the most important and prevalent terms I teach my students is interdependence: relying on one another to complete tasks in the learning process. I am not sure I’ve ever met a teacher who does not value some form of collaboration in the classroom. But if we want to create a culture of collaboration in classrooms, there are two group grading practices that require further examination.
#1: Giving Uniform Group Grades
Early in my teaching career, I had my geography students complete a final project that required them to work with three other classmates to create a country of their choosing. The details of the project do not matter, but the way I graded students on the project does: Every group member received the same grade. I made this stipulation clear to students, with the (misguided) mindset that this would motivate them to more effectively collaborate with one another.
In Fair Isn’t Always Equal, Rick Wormeli highlights the idea that “group grades tend to create unhealthy peer pressure among classmates, often generating negative feelings” (p. 127).
But the main issue with giving uniform group grades is that it violates our working definition of a grade: an accurate measure of a student’s learning at that moment in time. A group grade does not reflect an individual student’s achievement or growth. It does not allow for individual feedback or provide the teacher with information for further instruction. .
Should students have opportunities to collaborate throughout their learning process? Absolutely! Should that collaboration receive a grade? Only if there are parameters in place to ensure that the grade measures each individual student’s level of learning.
#2: Grading on a Curve
I realize this may not be as common as it was during my days as a student, but I still hear my students discussing being graded on a curve in various classes, especially in heavy content courses.
Curved grading is not an accurate measure of a student’s learning; it is a comparative (and competitive) measure against classmates. Guskey and Bailey (2001) encourage teachers to recognize that curved grading detracts from a classroom’s culture of collaboration because students “readily see that helping others become successful threatens their own chances” of receiving a higher grade.
Additionally, every single grade a student receives should be measured against some standard of mastery.
If I believe my students understand how to identify logical fallacies in a nonfiction argument, but the highest grade on the summative assessment is only a 78%, how can I justify that as 100% or even 90% mastery? At this point, students need intervention, not grade manipulation. In this case, as the teacher I need to backtrack and complete the steps below:
Ditch my previous lesson instruction progression because it was not effective for student learning.
Analyze the assessment results to diagnose gaps in understanding.
Based on those results, create a reteaching lesson.
Formatively assess students to ensure they have a stronger understanding of the skill.
Give a similar assessment where students can demonstrate their learning for that skill at that moment in time.
In his book Not Light, but Fire, Matthew Kay expresses how he believes that collaboration is one of the “most haphazardly executed aspects of teachers’ pedagogy” (p. 16). He encourages teachers to be more intentional about communicating and training students to understand how to collaborate most efficiently. He also gives the warning that when this does not take place, collaboration efforts can backfire and become a detriment to the classroom environment.
The same is true for grading. To create a culture of collaboration, encourage interdependence during the learning process, not when assessing their learning. Also, do everything you can to create a community of learners who understand that the more all of their classmates thrive, the more they will, as well.
Questions for Faculty Discussion
Have teachers share how they currently grade work completed in groups.
Are there tangible ways to modify group projects to assess individual contributions and learning?
Is there any curved grading that takes place in your school? If so, how can the content from this article influence the way teachers view the topic?
What are ways you intentionally communicate and train students how to work in a group interdependently? I included a few ideas from my classroom below.
Every group interaction begins with the directive to “face one another and greet one another, with eye contact.” This helps to create a welcoming environment that is discussion-oriented.
As often as possible, give students defined roles within a group. Craft each role to make each member’s contribution is essential.
I love using Jigsaw instruction when teaching students about topics that are heavy in content: logical fallacies, advanced rhetorical techniques, poetic devices.
Group reflection and self-assessments help all students to evaluate each member’s role and how interdependence led to their success or failure.
Utilize technology and digital tools (Google docs and Padlet) that allow students to work together and share resources both in and outside the classroom.
———————
FIND THIS ARTICLE HELPFUL?
Forward it to a friend and then sign up to receive our weekly newsletter. You’ll get every new article and resource straight to your inbox on Fridays - including the latest in the “Making the Grade” series!
We hope these resources bless your schools and your work!
