Grading Approach: Defining the Ultimate Method of Performance Evaluation

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Grading Approach: Defining the Ultimate Method of Performance Evaluation

Table of Contents

Introduction
Grading System Description
Problems and Dilemmas
Grading Rubrics
Conclusion
Reference List

Introduction

Evaluating students performance is, perhaps, one of the most challenging tasks in teaching practice (Stevens & Levi, 2005). Because of the differences in students personal progress and their progress measured according to the existing system, grading sometimes turns into a complicated dilemma. By developing an elaborate grading approach, a teacher can possibly avoid ethical issues in evaluating students performance and provide an adequate assessment of students progress (Jones, 2008).

Grading System Description

The grading system that I have developed allows for evaluating students performance in practically any discipline. It includes five key aspects of a students performance, i.e., knowledge of the material, ability to use it for a practical task, the skill of analyzing information critically, the ability to work in team and the art of time management. Thus, I am going to check not only students ability to memorize theory blindly, but also their skill of applying their knowledge to practice (Barches, 2010). In addition, the given approach allows for checking students capability of working in a team, which is an essential skill that they will need to develop later in their career (Shriemann, 2008).

While the given approach is not quite common in Kuwait, I would like to reinforce it as a means to encourage students need for lifelong learning (OConnor, 2009). While in Kuwait, a more elaborate grading system is adopted (KUWAIT, n. d.), I prefer to grade students in accordance with the following scale: Excellent (0-3 mistakes), Good (45 mistakes), Average (69 mistakes), Poor (1012 mistakes), Unacceptable (more than 12 mistakes) (Stufflebeam, Madaus & Kellaghan, 2000).

Problems and Dilemmas

I would like the given grading system to help the student learn what skills (s)he has to work on. However, the system in question only checks the basic skills and does not help define why certain aspects of performance were graded negatively. Therefore, I would like to introduce more rubrics into the given system. For example, in problem solving, a student may create a completely new method of solving the task, yet have no idea of the traditional one (Morris, 2008). On the one hand, I should give him/her points for creativity; on the other hand, I should withdraw the points for not knowing the theory and grade the performance as unacceptable. Therefore, I will have to improve the given system a notch to have a better idea of the students abilities.

Grading Rubrics

Aspect/Grade	Unacceptable	Poor	Average (Pass)	Good	Excellent
Knowledge of theory	The student has no idea of the theory.	The student is unable to list the basic theoretical points and give examples	The student is able to list the basic theoretical points	The student is able to list the basic theoretical points and give examples.	The student is able to list all theoretical points and give examples
Problem solving	The student is unable to apply theory to solve a practical problem.	The student is able to explain the algorithm of basic problem solving.	The student is able to apply theory to solve a practical problem.	The student is able to integrate several theories to solve a practical problem.	The student is able to think outside the box to solve a practical problem.
Critical thinking	The student is unable to think critically.	The students judgments lack objectivity.	The student can pass an objective judgment.	The student can pass an objective judgment and provide reasons for it.	The student is capable of synthesizing several viewpoints and producing an original idea.
Teamwork	The student sabotages other teammates work.	The student does not work in a team efficiently	The student works in a team efficiently.	The student shows initiative when working in a team.	The student is able to organize work in his/her team
Work organization	The student is unable to organize his/her work.	The student organizes his/her work poorly.	The student organizes his/her work.	The student organizes his/her work neatly.	The student organizes his/her work neatly and follows his/her plan exactly.

Conclusion

While the grading approach described above is far from being perfect, it still offers a clear and cohesive system of students performance evaluation. I personally prefer the given system, since it allows for being objective and making an honest observation of students progress (Lothringer, 2008). Though some issues may occur, the approach developed in the given paper helps face the possible problems and solve them fast.

Reference List

Barches, S. (2010). Bright and brainy: 3^rd grade practice. Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Education.

Jones, C. J. (2008). Curriculum-based assessment: The easy way to determine response-to-intervention. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishing, Ltd.

KUWAIT (n. d.). Kuwait University. Web.

Lothringer, L. B. (2008). Evaluation of the sue of academic integrity training course as a proactive measure encouraging academic honesty. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.

Morris, M. (2008). Evaluation ethics for best practice: Cases and commentaries. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

OConnor, A. B. (2009). Critical instruction and evaluation: A teaching resource. Mississauga, CA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Shriemann, M. (2008). Developing science writing skills, grades 58. Boston, MA: Mark Twain Media Carson Dellosa Publishing Company.

Stevens, M. J. & Levi, A. (2005). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Stufflebeam, D. L., Madaus, T., & Kellaghan, T. (2000). Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Click Here To Order Now!