ELT News Think Tank

This Month's Think Tank Panel

Marc Helgesen

Peter Viney

Curtis Kelly

Chris Hunt

Panelists: Marc | Peter | Curtis | Chris
Date: November 2003

Topic: "How important is grading and testing?"

Marc Helgesen

Let's start with a myth - one that is believed and misunderstood by many, many teachers. That myth is the idea that the scores for a class should form a bell curve.

Most students, some teachers think, are average, so perhaps half ought to get C's. Another 15% should be on each side of the peak, so they get B's and D's respectively. And only about 10% should get the top level A's (and of course, their 10% counterparts at the other end of the spectrum fail).

“The important thing to get is that normed tests do not measure the students against what they know. They measure them against each other.”

Wrong concept. Wrong test. A bell curve is how you grade a norm-referenced test. A norm-referenced test compares students to each other. That is fine for an IQ test or something like the TOEIC or TOEFL. ("TOEFL," by the way, is the German word for "Devil." They spell it differently, T-E-U-F-E-L, but, hey, it's German. Of course it is spelled differently. But anyway, that's another story.). The important thing to get is that normed tests do not measure the students against what they know. They measure them against each other.

Key concept in educational testing: It is only fair to test students on what you have taught them.

Given that, you should not be "grading on a curve." You should be giving criterion-referenced tests. That means you figure out what you are teaching (the "criteria" for passing the class.) Test the learners on that. And, assuming you've been doing a good job, most students should do well. Everyone wins.

You taught it. They learned it. Everyone has done their part.

This means you ought to have a scale that looks more like this: A few are at the low end, but most learners will have done well. If they learned what they were supposed to, they should get a good grade.

But wait, you might say. Isn't that "dumbing things down?" Not everyone does as well as each other. Again, it has to do with what you are testing. If you asked them to learn x, and they did, they should pass, even if someone else learned x+1 (or x+2 or x+10).

Think about it this way: let's say you are going to take your driving test. You've gone to driving school. You've studied the manual. You've practiced. You are ready to take the test. You get to the driving center that day and notice that the person standing in line next to you is Formula 1 driver Michael Schumacher. He's arguably the best race car driver in the world. A better driver than you, no doubt. Does that mean your grade on the test - whether you pass or not - should somehow be impacted by the fact that he taking the test? Of course not. You were asked to learned x (How to drive, rules of the road, etc.). The fact that Schumacher learned x+1 (x+F1?) has nothing to do with your skill. You met the criterion.

Am I suggesting everyone should get A's and B's, that good grades are a freebie? No. There are students who don't do the classwork. Some don't do the homework. Those who value their part-time jobs more than classes. Those who don't make it to class. They fail. They haven't met the criteria. But when the criteria is clear, only a few fall into that category.

But if most or all of your students did well and the test results show it, they get good grades. Great. They deserve it. It's like you get an "A," too. They did well so it shows you did well.

OK, now I've got that off my chest.

A few other notes about testing
There was an article in the Washington Post "Unconventional Wisdom" column last April that was reprinted in the Daily Yomiuri. It reported that students who ate a high-calorie diet on test days did better on their tests. (You can read the column here) They called it "sugar surge." Anyway, it seemed worth trying. So I brought chocolate chip cookies to the first term test with a couple classes. I compared their scores with two classes who took the same class and the same test the year earlier. Keep in mind mine was not a scientific study. That wasn't my purpose. There was no control group (What am I going to do? Say, "OK, this half of the room gets cookies. That half, get to work!"). I was using the same textbook as the year before but, of course, had added and taken away various activities. And, of course, every class has its own culture, its own atmosphere. So there were too many variables to generalize. But what was interesting was that there were 18% more A's this year and 12% fewer C's. Did the cookies and the sugar surge work? Was just the idea of the teacher doing something special on test day enough to relax them (lower the affective filter). Who knows? But if I can get a double-digit increase in A's with something as simple as cookies, I'll sure keep trying it.

When I can, I try to make it possible for learners to decide their own grades. For example, in my reading classes, they get a list called "choose your own grade." They have to read over 500 pages per term. 501 pages gets them a 65. Most are not satisfied with that and read more. You can see the scale on the extensive reading webpages (it's the fifth item on the page). So students really do choose their own grade. More exactly, they choose how much they will read, and that determines their grade.

A final thought on grading, at least in Japanese universities. Once accepted into university, most students will graduate. Only those who really screw up don't. Given that, it might be worth talking to your students about the value of grades and tests. When they were in high school, tests decided their future - Would they get into university? Which one?

But now, if they are in university, school grades and tests no longer have the same role (though, tests like the TOEIC may). Once they are out of school, no one will ever ask what grade they got in first-year conversation or third-year business English. The only thing that counts is what they learned and what they can do.

That's why we're teaching and that's why they are studying.

Panelists: Marc | Peter | Curtis | Chris

Marc Helgesen, Miyagi Gakuin Women's College

Co-author of English Firsthand and Active Listening

<<Back Number | Top | Recent Issue>>