NYT Article Re: Sense of Entitlement to Good Grades

[Cheshire_Cat]

It's quaint kittythrones believes she'll have the income needed to homeschool or send her kids to school in France.

 

I have known several professors (some even single income) who homeschooled their children.  It can be done.  Academia lends itself to homeschooling.

[brown_eyed_girl]

This is a really fascinating topic, and one that I have mixed feelings about. On one hand, I agree that no one is entitled to a good grade. Effort sometimes is not enough; I certainly observed that with international students who struggled to write a coherent humanities paper. On the other, though, I think a lot of times in academia we put a premium on things being hard. Of course material should be challenging and people should be held to a high standard of work, but at the same time, if a professor is an effective and caring instructor, I think it should be possible to succeed in a class without being an expert.

 

I totally get the arguments about not wanting to dumb-down materials or lower expectations, which I believe to be a problem in many educational systems. That said, while upper-division or major-restricted courses should certainly hold people to a high standard, shouldn't students without extensive background knowledge of a subject be capable of doing well in a lower division course if they pay attention in class, take good notes, do all the reading/assignments, and engage with the material? If that's not possible for most people, shouldn't we consider whether perhaps the instructor and educational system is also failing? 

 

I also think we need to acknowledge how much pressure is put on undergrad students to do well, especially for the ever-increasing numbers of students interested in graduate school. I maintained a 4.00 at a good college, but I'm a bit ashamed to admit that because I wanted to go to a top tier graduate school, I was very risk-averse with my course load. Yes, I challenged myself within my field and did honors programs and all that, and I branched out to other other humanities and social sciences fields, which have always been my strengths. I even excelled at earth sciences. But I largely avoided taking classes outside of my wheel house because I was scared of taking a class where I didn't know how to succeed; where I might get a B or a C that would hurt my chances of getting into a great grad school. For example, I think physics is fascinating and love listening to TED talks and reading articles about it, but I never would have signed up for a physics class in college because I knew I couldn't compete with people in the hard sciences. I knew I wasn't entitled to a good grade in a course like that and that I probably wouldn't get one... but because of that, I missed out on challenging myself in that way. I think that's a real pitfall of the way the grading system is structured. 

 

I'll also say, one of the college classes that I found most rewarding and that has stuck with me the most was a class where the professor said from day one that if you showed up and turned in the assignments, you'd get an A. He told us: "Life is not about grades. You should do your best in my class because you want to, because you should realize that the standard you hold yourself to will follow you through all that you do, and there are no grades in the real world. I want you to do the kind of work that you are proud of, whether or not you think I'll like it. This isn't about me, it's about you and your education." I think about him often. 

Edited April 30, 2015 by brown_eyed_girl

[victorydance]

I have known several professors (some even single income) who homeschooled their children.  It can be done.  Academia lends itself to homeschooling.

 

The idea of someone who is employed by a university to teach and do research homeschooling their children is completely bizarre to me.

[Cheshire_Cat]

The idea of someone who is employed by a university to teach and do research homeschooling their children is completely bizarre to me.

 

There are some who see the education system, especially at its lower levels, and decide that it isn't an effective way to educate their children, and they can do it better. Obviously, with a Ph.D and experience with teaching, a lot of the time they can. 

[scarvesandcardigans]

There are some who see the education system, especially at its lower levels, and decide that it isn't an effective way to educate their children, and they can do it better. Obviously, with a Ph.D and experience with teaching, a lot of the time they can. 

 

Perhaps those professors/university employees easily witness the outcome of public school education that is outlined within this article (Students looking for ultra-efficient formulas to get As) and decide they want to instill a different work ethic within their own children.

[scarvesandcardigans]

Entire post.

 

Very thought-provoking response.  

 

I agree that no one is “entitled” to a good grade. One thing I might add is that effort is also relative. For one student, a real effort might be found in camping out in the library all night to research and write a paper, whereas another student might see a couple of hours’ worth of time for that same paper to be sufficient. Professors and lecturers have their expectations and should be clear on the level of effort that they deem appropriate for earning an A, or at the very least a passing grade.

 

One of my professors had his students do multiple evaluations throughout the semester. He would ask us to grade ourselves on our participation, assignments, attendance, etc. He would then provide his own grading of each student and return it to us so that we could see how our efforts were aligning with his expectations. I thought that was a very effective way of helping me get on track with where I should have been and where I was as far as my experience in the class. Those courses ended up being some of the most engaging and interesting during my college career.

 

I also agree that students without extensive background knowledge should be capable of doing well in lower-division courses, but then effort comes into play again. How many students will actually follow through by being attentive at all of the lectures, by taking good notes, doing the assignments, and engaging in the material? An upper-level course of majors will obviously (and hopefully the majority of students will) be interested in content, because that’s what they worked hard to get to, but will a lower-level course of the same topic warrant the same amount of interest? I am sure that it’s possible for most people, but is it probable? An amount of accountability should indeed be placed on the student, as mentioned, but there is a responsibility on the instructor to step back and evaluate whether or not they are being as effective as they can be. There should be a sort of evolution that takes place.

 

Often I have worked with students that just don’t care about the material for a certain course because those lower-level courses are normally outside of the desired field of study. It hurts me, and I’m sure it hurts the instructor when a student says (and demonstrates through effort, or lack thereof) that they just don’t care and don’t understand why that subject has to be taught. I think there needs to be an effort to try to make content in all courses relevant and interesting, especially when there is a variety of interest within the classroom.

 

 

Regarding “playing it safe” with courses, one of the best pieces of advice that I ever received was to branch out and take the more difficult courses. This came during my freshman year with my academic advisor. I was more interested in taking a biology course because it was the “easy science” at my university, and he suggested that I try something different that I really wanted to do, like astronomy. He said that future schools would rather see that I put myself out there in an unknown or difficult situation and that I tried my best than see that I had stuck with general courses gave me good grades, but nothing interesting. It sounds like you, brown_eyed_girl, kind of have a regret of not doing that, and I agree that it is definitely one of the pitfalls within academia. I have had that same fear over and over, but that one slice of advice really overpowered whenever it came time to choose classes. And because I branched out, I did earn a couple of Cs, but I also learned the value of my own work ethic in the process. I would take those grades any day over an A in a course that I didn’t have to put effort into earning.

 

I have to say that the advice from your last paragraph is really striking. I like it a lot. So much so that I’ll probably end up writing it down to remember it later in time, or when things get difficult. After a rough semester during which I earned one of my C grades, I spoke with the professor (I ended up taking 3 of his courses actually) and told him about my grade. He looked at me, and then just asked, “But did you LEARN something?” I thought about it, and about how I couldn’t stop talking about his course material weeks after it had ended, and it made me feel a lot better. I did learn a lot, and his philosophy was very much the same as your professor’s: realize the standard to which you should hold yourself and that it’s about us and our education.

[rising_star]

I think with most topics, putting in the effort that I did should result in at least a B.  However, some topics are just hard to understand.  And if you don't understand the material, you shouldn't pass.  

 

This totally depends on the student and their preparation for college. I have taught students that literally never wrote a paper before coming to college. Do they understand the material? Yes, and they can explain it to me orally. When they go to put it in writing, however, it can be totally different. For those students, hours upon hours of work can result in a grade lower than a B because they simply have not yet learned some of the fundamentals expected of them. At the same time, other students who may not have a mastery of the content are able to pass classes because they know how to seem like they understand the material or because of the way the evaluation for the course is set up. It really isn't as simple as you say, Cheshire_Cat.

[TakeruK]

I am really against the idea that one should only give out X A-grades, Y B-grades, and Z C-grades etc. That is, I don't like the idea of grading students based on their performance relative to each other rather than against a well published and clear standard. There are some places where "relative" grading is useful, usually when there is a standard to grade against and a need to compare students performance relative to each other (e.g. GREs or other standardized tests). However, for most college classes, I don't see a need to grade in this manner and I don't think it's a fair way to grade. 

 

In my courses, I always tell students exactly what I expect for each grade. That way, they know what I want to see and they can perform accordingly. I'm happy to give every single student an "A" if they meet my standard for the "A" grade. 

 

But another point of debate, which is relevant to the title of this thread (note: from SIX years ago, so many of us commenting today might be part of the undergraduate cohort that article was talking about ), is where to set these standards. 

 

In my own grading metric, "effort" is never directly considered. However, there are enough ways to gain partial credit that someone who tries hard enough but still fail to get the exact right answer can still earn enough for a B- or so. I usually grade each problem out of 10 points and I usually only award 2 points for the right answer. The other 8 points are usually for things like 1) correct approach to the problem, 2) clear description of what they are doing, 3) clear statement of assumptions in their calculation, 4) demonstrating correct conceptual understanding of the system. There is certainly value in actually computing the right value, but if they simply made a calculation error in the first step that carried all the way through (so all actual answers were wrong but they demonstrated correct understanding of the physics), then they can still get up to 8/10. 

 

This is where "effort" comes in, indirectly. I find that students who have tried hard on the problem will take more time to explain what they are doing, which will result in more points for "clear description of steps/assumptions". They might have also thought deeply about the problem, and perhaps they make some critical conceptual error that only gets them part of the way, but the time they spent thinking probably results in a few initial steps being correct. So, someone who didn't fully understand every bit of it can still manage to get something like 6 or 7 out of 10 points. On the other hand, someone who saw the problem and decided to just give up without thinking very hard about it and just scribbling down the most basic of steps will probably only score between 0 and 2 points. 

 

Overall, I do think that in classes, more effort does (indirectly) translate to higher grades for my students. But that effort needs to be demonstrated in a concrete way and in a way that shows actual understanding to earn points. I never award points for things like "but I worked 10 hours on this!". Students that complain to me about grades with this reason are shown the grading rubric and I explain to them how to earn points for the problem. I also talk to them about why they took so long (usually problem sets are designed for 5-6 hours of work) and try to help them by identifying the point of confusion and helping them learn the material they need to get past the places they are stuck on. Sometimes it's just a misunderstanding of a theorem or equation in class or teaching them a method/technique that they somehow missed from a pre-requisite class.

[Cheshire_Cat]

This totally depends on the student and their preparation for college. I have taught students that literally never wrote a paper before coming to college. Do they understand the material? Yes, and they can explain it to my orally. When they go to put it in writing, however, it can be totally different. For those students, hours upon hours of work can result in a grade lower than a B because they simply have not yet learned some of the fundamentals expected of them. At the same time, other students who may not have a mastery of the content are able to pass classes because they know how to seem like they understand the material or because of the way the evaluation for the course is set up. It really isn't as simple as you say, Cheshire_Cat.

Thats more of an indictment of our public school system than anything.  I had never written a graded paper until college, yet my English classes were among the easiest for me.  But obviously, things aren't as simple as a three paragraph post makes them out to be.  I'm speaking more about averages.

[Sigaba]

[T]here are no grades in the real world.

 

 

I'm not sure what this unnamed professor means.

 

In corporate America, which often (and incorrectly_ claims that the Ivory Tower knows nothing about the "real world," there are performance evaluations, 360 evaluations, customer/client satisfaction surveys, and other forms of subjective assessment, many of which have scores and grades attached. They go hand in hand with bottom line metrics like utilization and profitability.

[random_grad]

perhaps I am just too much of an optimist but I don t see much of a problem in grades being inflated, kids being entitled etc. I am confident that those who are able and deserve it will eventually learn to work hard, exploit their talents and choose the right career. I discussed it with my older friends and they all concurred that eventually all their classmates and friends found their vocation so to speak - and ultimately that s what matters right?

the fact that some graders take a lenient approach while others are tough is fine: this is part of learning and teaches people that the world is heterogeneous. The fact that students choose to be strategic about their course choices is fine too because it was the right choice for them at the time. Now one might feel regret but that would force that person to make choices differently in the future, which is great... my point being: I think there are some much more serious issues going on apart from grades, and one of them is undergraduate admissions, together with the fact that the system allows people to graduate without any practical skills. Why is a history or philosophy major unable to find much but basic office jobs while folks from college with a certificate in, say, HR get better positions? Imo universities at the undergraduate level should require students to acquire a profession with real world prospects aside from their major. Worse case scenario: it works to broaden your worldview. this would both alleviate the anxiety and frustration for job prospects (and incidentally reduce entitlement and anxiety to get all As) and make future academics more understanding of the "real world".

Edited May 1, 2015 by random_grad

[Sigaba]

perhaps I am just too much of an optimist but I don t see much of a problem in grades being inflated, kids being entitled etc.

 

If you get a phone call from either a parent of one of your students OR from your department telling you that a parent has called to complain about the grade you gave his/her child OR a letter from an ambiguously titled staffer in the athletic department OR you have students shutting down on you because you won't tell them what they want to hear, then your views on entitled undergraduates may change.

[random_grad]

I was not saying they don t exist.

[TakeruK]

Although dealing with Sigaba's example of entitled behaviour from my students is certainly frustrating, demoralizing and annoying, I try not to let it get to me. 

 

So in that sense, I agree with random_grad's sentiments that different grading approaches are fine and grades don't really matter because the real world will sort the students out in the end. So if I end up having to grade more leniently or more harshly than I would like to, whether it's because the department policies say so, or the professor of the course wants the curve a certain way, I just do it. I don't think it's my responsibility to "defend" my worldview of what grades are supposed to mean because hey, it's just my own opinion and there's no reason that other methods aren't just as valid. 

 

Unless I feel that I am participating in a grading policy that does not have academic integrity or is actually unfair, I am not going spend a lot of my time or energy worrying about these issues. I do believe that things will sort itself out later down the road when grades do not really matter.

[BiochemMom]

The idea of someone who is employed by a university to teach and do research homeschooling their children is completely bizarre to me.

Several of the profs in my chemistry and biochemistry departments homeschooled as well. They're all still married and both themselves and their respective spouse teach their children. I've had long conversations with each parent due to me being older in the program and seeking advice on work life balance. Trust me, it's doable. It's hard to figure out how initially, but very doable.

Edited May 3, 2015 by BiochemMom

[Sword_Saint]

I didn't have an opinion about grade entitlement one way or the other until I took the Justice and Society course required for my undergrad. The professor asked the class of 25 students to raise their hands if they thought that because they paid to be there, they should get a high grade. A follow up to that was if a student works hard, regardless of the final product, the student should get a high grade. My mind was blown by how many students (3/4's) thought they deserved a high grade irrespective of their homework and exams in the course.

 

The semester after that in an Applied Stats class the professor graded everything pretty easy such even mediocre students had A's in the class. It was his first time teaching that course and he admitted that he graded too leniently but would change that in subsequent semesters. That was the most painful course for me because I was in a group with two other individuals who, 14 weeks into the 15 week semester, didn't understand anything about statistics, but they still had A's. It really devalued all of the work I put in to understand everything and receive a high grade.

 

Lastly on my rant: plenty of students leave scathing reviews for professors who make the students work for their grades. One of the things that irritates me the most is when I hear students brag about taking a class where the professor grades easily and requires virtually nothing from the students. Not that there is a clear and identifiable relationship between tough grading and good teaching but I have to stop and wonder if the professors who are "easy" graders teach the students just as well as the professors who are "hard" graders.

[bhr]

I'm sorry, but the lack of respect here for students, both as learners and simply as human beings, is just stunning. Yes, some students may believe that hard work entitles them to high grades, but that shouldn't be a surprise or a problem. They've been taught that working hard should get positive results, and that's not a bad thing. We should be rewarding and recognizing that practice, not telling them that working hard still isn't good enough. No, grades shouldn't be earned just for showing up, and students need to meet the standards of a grade to earn it, but we shouldn't criticize them for not being happy with failure, and we definitely shouldn't, like some people in this thread suggest, punish students who ask for higher grades based on effort.

 

Now, maybe I'm different, in that I teach in a field where process is as important as the end result, so I can have students earn grades higher than their overall project scores, but shouldn't that be a universal practice? If a student learns the process of mastering a field, even if they haven't finished mastering it within the confines of a semester, is it wrong to reward that learning?

 

I also have to really criticize the poster on the first page who suggested that, if students are missing essential knowledge for a course, that it is solely on them to seek it out. That's both bad pedagogy and practice, as it puts the pressure on the student to complete extra work just to compete, while not recognizing or supporting that effort. When the playing field is already slanted against some students, we should do everything possible to avoid making it worse.

 

The truth is that college should be the place where you learn that hard work doesn't always net optimal results, but that doesn't deserve to be mocked. If a student comes to you unsure of why their work resulted in a grade lower than they feel they earned, we, as instructors, should see that as an opportunity to discuss with them what work they did and why it didn't get the results it wanted, Maybe they didn't really work as hard as they thought (comparing college effort to HS, or grad to undergrad, for example). Maybe they have educational or emotional needs that can be addressed by some of the resources on campus that hurt their grades. Maybe they didn't clearly understand the assignments or prompts (and that may well be on us as instructors for expecting students to be able to translate what we wrote into what we actually meant). And yes, maybe they just are spoiled by easy high school classes and aggressive parents, but that doesn't mean that we don't have an opportunity to talk to them about expectations.

 

Maybe I'm naive, but I can't understand why anyone would want to teach who seems to hate students as much as some of you claim to.

[scarvesandcardigans]

I'm sorry, but the lack of respect here for students, both as learners and simply as human beings, is just stunning. Yes, some students may believe that hard work entitles them to high grades, but that shouldn't be a surprise or a problem. They've been taught that working hard should get positive results, and that's not a bad thing. We should be rewarding and recognizing that practice, not telling them that working hard still isn't good enough. No, grades shouldn't be earned just for showing up, and students need to meet the standards of a grade to earn it, but we shouldn't criticize them for not being happy with failure, and we definitely shouldn't, like some people in this thread suggest, punish students who ask for higher grades based on effort.

 

Now, maybe I'm different, in that I teach in a field where process is as important as the end result, so I can have students earn grades higher than their overall project scores, but shouldn't that be a universal practice? If a student learns the process of mastering a field, even if they haven't finished mastering it within the confines of a semester, is it wrong to reward that learning?

 

I also have to really criticize the poster on the first page who suggested that, if students are missing essential knowledge for a course, that it is solely on them to seek it out. That's both bad pedagogy and practice, as it puts the pressure on the student to complete extra work just to compete, while not recognizing or supporting that effort. When the playing field is already slanted against some students, we should do everything possible to avoid making it worse.

 

The truth is that college should be the place where you learn that hard work doesn't always net optimal results, but that doesn't deserve to be mocked. If a student comes to you unsure of why their work resulted in a grade lower than they feel they earned, we, as instructors, should see that as an opportunity to discuss with them what work they did and why it didn't get the results it wanted, Maybe they didn't really work as hard as they thought (comparing college effort to HS, or grad to undergrad, for example). Maybe they have educational or emotional needs that can be addressed by some of the resources on campus that hurt their grades. Maybe they didn't clearly understand the assignments or prompts (and that may well be on us as instructors for expecting students to be able to translate what we wrote into what we actually meant). And yes, maybe they just are spoiled by easy high school classes and aggressive parents, but that doesn't mean that we don't have an opportunity to talk to them about expectations.

 

Maybe I'm naive, but I can't understand why anyone would want to teach who seems to hate students as much as some of you claim to.

 

"Hate" is such a strong term in this case. Maybe I'm just covering my own ass, but in my post I hope I didn't make it out that way. I really do agree with a lot of what you say here. Educators at any level should be able to openly discuss grades and overall standing within a course. I think that we as the (future) educators should find our roles in encouraging those students to come to us with any concerns. If a student can show me that they have learned the (or part of the) process in the particular field where I teach, then I am really pleased. That's progress! As my professor mentioned (in previous post), it's whether or not you learned something (I'll add something significant) that is more important to me than the grade on a page. I think that a lot of what is being discussed here goes without an open line of communication between teachers and students, which is really what we need. I learned the lesson in college that the professors DO want to help, after being told so many times that it was "up to me" to figure it all out. 

[Karoku_valentine]

It depends on how you measure effort. Right answers (mostly in hard sciences) equal effort or talent as long as there was no cheating.

[Marst]

Sorry, misread a post.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Marst

[Sword_Saint]

Yes, some students may believe that hard work entitles them to high grades, but that shouldn't be a surprise or a problem. They've been taught that working hard should get positive results, and that's not a bad thing. We should be rewarding and recognizing that practice, not telling them that working hard still isn't good enough.

 

For me, hard work equaling entitlement is a problem because not everyone is equally capable of completing a given task. Some individuals are no more capable of obtaining _____ degree than I am of being an Olympic athlete. My former adviser was right in this respect I believe, that not only is everyone not equally capable, but to award students a degree when they aren't capable of well representing your field is a disservice to the discipline (whatever your discipline is). There is a growing stigma in our society where you need a degree to be successful in life but it devalues the worth of a degree, especially if educators are willing to reward based on effort and not on outcomes. In the job field I am judged on what I am capable of doing, not what I am capable of trying to do. In the end working hard isn't good enough, I believe thinking that it does overly simplifies a complicated interaction of hard work, ability, determination, etc. 

 

 

Now, maybe I'm different, in that I teach in a field where process is as important as the end result, so I can have students earn grades higher than their overall project scores, but shouldn't that be a universal practice? If a student learns the process of mastering a field, even if they haven't finished mastering it within the confines of a semester, is it wrong to reward that learning?

 

Maybe I'm naive, but I can't understand why anyone would want to teach who seems to hate students as much as some of you claim to.

 

Shouldn't it be the universal practice that process is as or more important than the end result? No. Because at the end of the day I want a doctor, lawyer, engineer, scientist (etc) who has good end results, not simply who tries and knows the process but is incapable of successfully completing something. While there may be some argument that we are evaluating progress and capability early in an individuals life (college age is pretty young), I wonder if it's ethically wrong to give students this false sense of security by rewarding things that are not results; because again, at least in my own experience, you can put 100 hours of work into a project but if the project isn't completed and done well your boss, professor or fellow group members will not find that satisfactory. 

 

Can you learn the process of "mastering a field" without having a good end result? I don't think you can. In a field like philosophy the end result may be a well formalized process (being a master of logic or mastering a philosophical argument that has no right answer) but even in that sort of field I'm skeptical that "mastery" can be achieved with only knowing process, especially knowing process while lacking end results. Educators are not grading a student while they are at home or after the student graduates; educators grade a student while the student is in their course, you are assuming that all students who know the process will master it after the confines of your semester- this is an assumption that I would posit isn't accurate. 

 

 

Expecting of students what the professional world expects of students I don't think is wrong- in fact to expect less of them, coddling them even, I think may be the wrong approach. It's a difference of opinion I guess, but a 20 year old college student is an adult, not a child, and I feel deserves to be treated like an adult which to me equates to them being held accountable for what they produce. Hard work is important, but the guy who easily completes a project and a guy who struggles to complete a project should be graded on the project, not on the struggling it took them to get there (obviously my personal opinion). 

Edited May 29, 2015 by Sword_Saint

[Marst]

Fortunately, this sense of entitlement because of effort is not instilled in children in the culture I grew up in. IMO grades should be given out based on the quality of produced work only. Take person A working at home and person B showing up to every lecture/class/tutorial/office hour. If A and B submit work of similar quality, giving them different grades is not justified. At all. Effort or hard work should only be rewarded by cutting people some slack if it comes to that, i.e. allowing someone to resubmit something, or partially revise his/her submission.

 

But then again, I am allergic to coddling (smothering) and even dropped a major because of it.

[Cheshire_Cat]

I think it is good to address both hard work and quality of work.  You don't get ahead in life if your work isn't quality, however brains aren't all there is to it.  You have to show up to work every day, even if you can get your work done in half the time.  Being smart also doesn't get you through the tedious tasks that your job will inevitably require of you at some point.  It takes hard work.  Having to actually attend class, or fill out a journal entry every day, or do other things that require consistency and effort are important parts of learning.

[Marst]

I think it is good to address both hard work and quality of work.  You don't get ahead in life if your work isn't quality, however brains aren't all there is to it.  You have to show up to work every day, even if you can get your work done in half the time.  Being smart also doesn't get you through the tedious tasks that your job will inevitably require of you at some point.  It takes hard work.  Having to actually attend class, or fill out a journal entry every day, or do other things that require consistency and effort are important parts of learning.

I agree with most you are saying, although probably not in the way you intend it. Indeed, brains is not all that constitutes achievement/results, on the contrary. Therefore, rewarding achievement with a good grades does not equal rewarding someone's brains or innate intelligence or something. Because of the correlation between effort and achievement, rewarding achievement implicitly rewards effort as well. The same goes for consistency, filling out a journal entry, and all these things that show in the final result. It is even true that there is a correlation between attendance and grades. Thus, even attendance shows in the final results and there is no need to include this in a grading policy.

 

Therefore, I argue that "effort" (that cannot be measured objectively anyway, and is therefore often reduced to attendance) should not be singled out and rewarded again. Of course, effort should be encouraged, because it helps people along in many aspects of their lives. I even think that effort should be rewarded in a natural way, which is at the same level as someone being polite, or considerate, or someone showing interest outside of the syllabus: as a TA I would be all the happier and patient to work with them. Yet, effort does not belong in a grading policy.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Marst

[TakeruK]

Fortunately, this sense of entitlement because of effort is not instilled in children in the culture I grew up in. IMO grades should be given out based on the quality of produced work only. Take person A working at home and person B showing up to every lecture/class/tutorial/office hour. If A and B submit work of similar quality, giving them different grades is not justified. At all. Effort or hard work should only be rewarded by cutting people some slack if it comes to that, i.e. allowing someone to resubmit something, or partially revise his/her submission.

 

But then again, I am allergic to coddling (smothering) and even dropped a major because of it.

 

While I agree with the overall statement that result should be the main factor in grade, not effort, I can think of some scenarios where this would be not ideal.

 

For example, I noticed that many US schools grade on a curve, while my experience with Canadian schools is that grades are awarded on a "this level of achievement = this grade" scheme. I think if you are grading on a curve, then judging purely on results is not fair. A person's work should not be devalued just because someone else did better. If grading is done on a curve, I believe that effort should play a bigger part in determining grade.

 

I also think it makes more sense to grade graduate students based on results rather than effort. I would relax this criteria for undergraduate students. I would prefer to see undergraduate courses be graded in a "here's a checklist of what you have to do, tick them off and you will get X grade". In undergraduate courses, we are not looking for the best of the best, we are just trying to establish basic competency. I think, in undergraduate courses, someone who meets all expectations should get the same grade as someone who decided to meet all the expectations and then go above and beyond. This is why I do not simply consider end-result when I grade undergraduate students.