Student Self Grading: Perception vs. Reality

Tara L. Crowell^1,

¹Public Health, Stockton University, Galloway, NJ, USA

Cite this paper:
Tara L. Crowell. Student Self Grading: Perception vs. Reality. American Journal of Educational Research. 2015; 3(4):450-455. doi: 10.12691/education-3-4-10

Abstract

The purpose of student self-grading is explored to discover not only students’ perception of grades but their experience with self-grading in college. Before student self-grading may be deemed a valid practice of accessing student learning, it is important for researchers to define how students perceive letter grades. Data was collected via a brief email survey from 144 undergraduate Public Health majors at a mid-size liberal arts college. Results indicate that students used three major categories in defining their perceptions of what each letter grade represent – Knowledge, Effort and Assignment, along with three minor categories – Learning, Critical Thinking and Success. Results also indicate that only about a third of participants actually engaged in self-grading in college and out of those who, do about 65% indicate that they graded themselves harder than their professors. These findings have implications for the discrepancies that may exist between professors vs. students’ perception of grade representation and ultimately the effectiveness of student self-grading in the classroom.

Keywords:
self grading perception reality

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. I., & Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms. How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 61, 315-343.
[2]	Andrade, H. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment. New York: Routledge.
[3]	Arter, J., Spandel, V., Culham, R. & Pollard, J. (1994). The impact of training students to be self-assessors of writing, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April.
[4]	Baird, J. R., & Northfield, J. R. (1992). Learning from the PEEL experience. Melbourne, Australia: Monash University.
[5]	Black, P., & Atkin, J. M. (1996). Changing the subject. Innovations in science, math, and technology education. London: Routledge.
[6]	Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery learning. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Mastery learning, theory and practice (pp. 47-63). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
[7]	Bloom, B. S.,&Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. The classification of educationalgoals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook I, Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green.
[8]	Boud, D. (1989). The role of self-assessment in student grading. Assessment and Evaluation in HigherEducation, 14, 20-30.
[9]	Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.). The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367-393). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[10]	Bryan, R., Krych, A., Carmichael, S., Viggiano, T. and Pawlina, W. (2005).Assessing professionalism in early medical education: Experience with peer evaluation and self-evaluation in the gross anatomy course Annals of Academy of Medicine in Singapore, 34(8), 486-491.
[11]	Chur-Hansen, A. (2000). Medical students’ essay-writing skills: Criteria-based self- and tutor-evaluation and the role of language background. Medical Education, 34, 194-198.
[12]	Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Faulk, B. (1995). Authentic assessment in action: Studies of schools and students at work. New York: Teachers College Press.
[13]	Fairbrother, R., Black, P., & Gill, P. (Eds.). (1995). Teachers assessing pupils. Lessons from science classrooms. Hatfield, UK: Association for Science Education.
[14]	Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, 146-166.
[15]	Falchikov, N. & Boud, D. (1989) Student self assessment in higher education: a meta-analysis, Review of Educational Research, 59 (4), pp. 395-430.
[16]	Henry, D. (1994). Whole Language Students with Low Self-direction: A self-assessment tool, ERIC ED 372 359 (Virginia, University of Virginia).
[17]	Hughes, B., Sullivan, H. & Mosley, M. (1985). External evaluation, task difficulty, and continuing motivation,Journal of Educational Research, 78, 210-215.
[18]	Kruger, J. and Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134.
[19]	Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom assessment minute by minute, day by day. Educational Leadership, 63 (3), 18-24.
[20]	Lind, D., Rekkas, S., Bui, V., Lam, T., Beierle, E., and Copeland, E. (2002).Competency-based student self-assessment on a surgery rotation. Journal of Surgical Research, 105, 31-34.
[21]	MacIntyre, P., Noels, K., and Clément, R. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety.  Language Learning 47 (2), 265-287
[22]	McLeod, A. (2001). In lieu of tests. Retrieved August 4, 2005, from National Teaching and Learning Forum’s Frequently Asked Questions at www.ntlf.com/html/lib/faq/al-ntlf.htm.
[23]	Maehr, M. & Stallings, R. (1972). Freedom from external evaluation, Child Development, 43, 177-185.
[24]	Mattheos, N., Nattestad, A., Falk-Nilsson, E. and Attstrom, R. (2004). Theinteractive examination: Assessing students’ self-assessment ability. Medical Education, 38, 378-389.
[25]	Parkin, C., & Richards, N. (1995). Introducing formative assessment at KS3, and attempt using pupil self-assessment. In R. Fairbrother, P. J. Black, & P. Gill (Eds.), Teachers assessing pupils. Lessonsfrom science classrooms (pp. 13–28). Hatfield, UK: Association for Science Education.
[26]	Pfeifer, J. K. (1981). The effects of peer evaluation and personality on writing anxiety and writing performancein college freshmen. Unpublished master’s thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.
[27]	Rees, C. (2003). Self-assessment scores and gender. Medical Education, 37, 571-573.
[28]	Rolheiser, Carol, and John A. Ross. “Student self-evaluation: What research says and what practice shows.” Plain talk about kids (2001): 43-57.
[29]	Ross, J. A., Rolheiser, C., & Hogaboam-Gray. (1998). Skills training versus action research inservice: Impact on student attitudes on self-evaluation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(5), 463-477.
[30]	Weaver, R. L.,&Cotrell, H.W. (1986). Peer evaluation: A case study. Innovative Higher Education, 11, 25-39.
[31]	Zoller, U. (1993). Are lecture and learning compatible? Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 195-197.
[32]	Zoller, U., Ben-Chaim, D., & Kamm, S. D. (1997). Examination-type preference of college students and their faculty in Israel and USA: A comparative study. School Science and Mathematics, 97(1), 3-12.
[33]	Zoller, U., Tsaparlis, G., Fastow, M., & Lubezky, A. (1997). Student self-assessment of higher-order cognitive skills in college science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27, 99-101.