Increasing Student Motivation Through Development And Grading Of Examinations And Homework

Tests, homeworks, and the associated grading policy and course management all play key roles in student perception of a course, and ultimately the program. A perception of unfairness, real or imagined, can decrease student motivation to learn, or in more serious cases, result in the students giving up on the course entirely, or even changing their major. In large enrollment courses that are taught by several instructors, there can be the problem of student perception with inequity in the difficulty of the versions of the examinations and homeworks issued, and the subsequent grading of these exams and homework. The starting point in developing ‘fair’ examinations is to develop appropriate and pertinent test questions. Examination questions should follow from the lesson objectives, which come from the course objectives. The course objectives should support the program objectives, which in turn are guided by ABET criteria. How do you link these pieces together to write a good examination? Additional questions quickly follow. What problem type or types should you use: Multiple Choice, True/ False, Short Answer, Short Calculation, Long Calculation, etc.? How many versions of an examination are necessary? What are the advantages and disadvantages of giving the examinations during the regular class periods, verses during an available common hour for the students of all the instructors? This paper will discuss possible solutions to these questions, as well as how to effectively use multiple graders, and the role of the restrictive and sometimes controversial cut scale. Student course assessment data will be presented to illustrate the positive and negative effect on student motivation, i.e. learning, when there is a perception of unfairness in the examinations or homework issued and/or subsequent grading. Introduction In the over 200 years West Point has been an undergraduate institution, it has consistently determined that students learn best in small sections of about 16 to 18 students. In order to facilitate and encourage additional discussion or tutoring to students after formal class periods, grade and assess student work, and prepare each lesson, the maximum teaching load that an instructor can effectively handle is four of these small sections. In our large enrollment courses that have more than 1,000 students, the course requires fifteen or more instructors. Most courses at West Point, including our electives, have multiple instructors. Theses multiple instructor courses work best when they are managed by one instructor – the course director. The course director is responsible for ensuring consistent content and grading philosophy throughout the course. The best technique for ensuring consistency is for the course director to write all the examinations and design problems, and occasionally the homework assignments as well. Consequently, the course director only teaches a maximum of two of these small sections. In this system, the course director has several concerns, especially about examinations. First, he must ensure all the instructors have adequately covered all the central concepts in the course. Second, he must craft an examination that is clearly written, and tests those important P ge 893.1 Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education concepts. Third, he must decide when to administer the examination, and how many versions of the examination are required. Fourth, a grading plan is needed to ensure consistent grading of the examinations. Last, the course director must capture the lessons learned from developing and administering the examination and use the information to improve the course in the future. Course Development Proper course development is the first and most important step in crafting good exams. There are numerous other papers that discuss course development in detail, so only a short summary of the method used by the authors will be presented here. Each course assists the program in meeting program outcomes through teaching essential topics that build towards fuller understanding. A course can be developed by breaking it into manageable pieces. First, you decide on course objectives. Part of this process is deciding on the central topics to cover, focused on the course objectives, and the amount of time to spend on each. The course objectives cover the essential topics and are relevant and important to the mastery of the course material. Each objective should be measurable or observable. The next step is to decide on the cognitive skill level you want to test each of the course objectives at. Bloom has identified a hierarchy of six cognitive skill levels: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Knowledge is demonstrated by the recall of information. Understanding and interpreting information is classified as the comprehension level. Application is the use of methods or concepts to solve problems. Recognition of patterns or the organization of components characterizes the analysis level. The synthesis skill level involves creating new knowledge from different areas or creating new ideas from old ones. The evaluation skill level is the ability to compare choices or ideas. The end result is a complete list of course objectives to include any secondary topics, written at the cognitive skill level you have determined you want the students to understand the material at. Too many course objectives are written at the lower three levels. Effort should be placed on pushing objectives into the higher three levels. Now the course objectives are arranged in a desired order with the associated number of lessons to cover the material. For each lesson, specific learning objectives are then developed. For example, in our Mechanics of Materials course, a course objective requiring two lessons to cover would be: • Given a state of stress at a point, determine the principle stresses (σ1 & σ2) and the maximum in-plane shear stress (τmax), the angle to the principal plane (θp), and the state of stress on any plane through the point (σx’ & τx’y’). One of the associated lessons on Stress Transformation would have the following Lesson Objectives: • Given a state of plane stress, solve for normal stresses and shear stresses on different planes. • Given a state of plane stress, solve for the principal (maximum and minimum) normal stresses (σ1 and σ2), and maximum in-plane shear stress (τmax). The next step is to write lesson plans that cover the learning objectives for that lesson. We use Board Notes to identify, formulate, script, and rehearse how and what will be discussed and presented on the chalkboard. Board Notes allow us to boil down presented material to the irreducible minimum. Figure 1 below depicts one page of Board Notes used by one of the authors to teach a lesson on Stress Transformation. Generally, the board notes should include both the pertinent theory for the lesson, and an example problem that illustrates the principle covered. Each block represents what, where, and how the minimum material is best presented P ge 893.2 Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education for a distinct section of blackboard space. Some instructors use four blocks (as shown in Figure 1) and others place six blocks on a sheet of paper based on their experience relating paper size to board space. The final step is to review the course to ensure the material and the lessons transition smoothly from topic to topic. Adequate coverage of course objectives is accomplished through efficient coverage of lesson objectives through well thought out board notes. Course Management There are many ways to manage a course when multiple instructors are teaching it. One way is to establish a loose framework for the course and allow each instructor to operate Figure 1: Example Board Notes