Grading Student Achievement in Higher Education: Signals and Shortcomings (review)
Buy Issue for $25 at JHUP- Grading Student Achievement in Higher Education: Signals and Shortcomings
Grading Student Achievement in Higher Education: Signals and Shortcomings offers a comprehensive and carefully documented account of the challenges and limitations associated with summative assessment of student achievement. Mantz Yorke, Visiting Professor in the Department of Educational Research at Lancaster University, draws from his extensive experience in higher education and his membership in the Measuring and Recording Student Achievement Scoping Group (established by Universities U.K. and the Standing Conference of Principals) to provide a carefully researched argument for changes in current grading practices in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. In addition to information on a variety of issues associated with "high stakes" summative assessment, the book also should be of interest to those seeking greater understanding of the similarities and differences that exist within the three higher education systems discussed.
Yorke aims to achieve three purposes in the book: to highlight the complexities and challenges of summative assessment; to suggest some alternatives that might be more responsive to changes within higher education; and to provide a resource for assessment for professionals and others charged with developing assessment practices. The book fulfills the first and third purposes and partially achieves the second one.
The structure allows readers to either peruse the text from start to finish or to browse among the chapters based on individual interests or needs. Chapter 1 explores the complexities inherent in assessment, particularly as it relates to the practice of grading student achievement. Readers who are relatively new to assessment will find the chapter useful for its introduction of key concepts such as the purposes of assessment, expectations from key stakeholders, differences between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced assessment, and technical considerations such as validity and reliability. The research cited in this chapter provides an excellent bibliography of resources for both new and experienced assessment practitioners.
Yorke describes the book's core (p. 8) as Chapters 2 ("Grading and Its Limitations"), 6 ("The Cumulation of Grades:), 8 ("Fuzziness in Assessment"), and 9 ("Judgement, Rather than Measurement?"). Chapter 2 explicates the complexities associated with grading practices, challenging assumptions about the implied precision of grades, describing inconsistencies within and between educational settings, and establishing a central component of his argument about the inherent "fuzziness" of grading. Chapter 6 provides a technical examination of how measurement error in calculating cumulative grades (i.e., grade point average) negatively impacts the ability to adequately differentiate among levels of student performance.
In Chapter 8, Yorke introduces the reader to Zadeh's (1993) "fuzzy set theory" (p. 173). Drawing from this theory and the work of more contemporary researchers, Yorke argues for an assessment practice that more accurately reflects the "fuzziness" and ambiguities associated with the grading process. The chapter asks readers to consider the notion that "good enough" assessment, or "satisficing" (p. 180), may be a more appropriate aim for summative assessment than the unattainable goal of precise measurement. The preceding chapters make a strong case in favor of Yorke's position, especially on the basis of pragmatic concerns that impede the ability of faculty to account for all of [End Page 505] the technical considerations required by a strict adherence to standard measurement practices.
Chapter 9 presents possible alternatives to the current emphasis on measurement- (or quasi-measurement) based assessment. The crux of Yorke's argument rests on the problems associated with assigning a single index of achievement to signify student performance (the honours classification in the United Kingdom and the cumulative grade point average in the United States). Yorke argues that the use of a single index obscures real differences in student achievement and provides insufficient information to students and other stakeholders (such as employers) about what the classification actually means. Although the chapter provides several alternatives, the extent to which any of these might be adopted on a wide scale is not specified, and each of the possible options carries its own set of challenges based on implications for practice, acceptance by stakeholders, or practicality...
