1. Personal Evolution of Grading Gregory Rodriguez Concordia
University Irvine
2. My History O Started teaching in the NCLB era. O My first
year I regrettably operated on Motivation 2.0 with the carrot and
the stick (Pink, 2009). O During my first year reflection I felt
like I had been anti-teaching and doing gotcha grading
(Wissner-Gross 2015). O In my second year I moved away from this
and focus on my instruction rather than on my students grades but
rather on their content driven skills.
3. My transition O After my first year I started to tinker and
toy with my various grading policy, trying a multitude of systems.
O It seemed that I was changing my grading procedure every semester
trying to find a balance. O Still in NCLB I tried to sift through
the confusion between formative and summative assessment (Chappius,
2007). O My goal was to move out of the extrinsic and into the
intrinsic motivation through multiple types of assessments. O I
wanted to motivate students without the reward based incentive much
like Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett did with their Good Player study
(Pink, 2009).
4. My current state O The advance of Common Core has greatly
change my own professional instruction and curriculum. O My goal is
to stay away from the 1/3 ratio as was explained by Elizabeth
Wissner-Gross and take away the fear of education. O Recently I
divided my grade book equally between my 4 major topics (essays,
projects, tests, and instruction). Trying to avoid semester killers
(Reeves, 2008). O I agreed with Reeves that interventions were
needed inside and outside of class to reduce the failure
rate(Reeves, 2008). I did this in two ways: 1. Assign homework from
the book Monday, collect Friday. All other work would be done and
explained in class. 2. Identify D and F students and require them
to go to lunch time tutoring to increase their grades.
5. My movement to the future O As I try to spend more time in
class to work on skill and advance critical thinking I need to have
more formative rather than summative assessments. O Agreeing that
these formative assessments can provide effective descriptive
feedback [focused] on the intended learning (Chappuis, 2007). O
With this slowed and more comprehensive instruction it will be like
Pink said in his interview that to create intrinsic motivation
students must be allowed autonomy, mastery, and purpose. O My goal
is for students not just to learn to take test but to learn skills
to better prepare themselves for their future.
6. References Congratulations for Passing Exams: Best Wishes
for Students. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2015, from
http://wishesmessages.com/congratulations-messages-for-passing-
exams-best-wishes-for-passing-tests/ Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The
surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead
Books. (2015). De-Grading Education [YouTube series episode]. In
TED Talks .Elizabeth Wissner-Gross. Reeves, D. (2008, February 1).
Effective Grading Practices. Teaching Students to Think, 85-87.
Pink, D. (2012, January 4). Daniel Pink - Autonomy, Mastery &
Purpose. Retrieved March 30, 2015, from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdzHgN7_Hs8 Chappuis, S., &
Chappuis, J. (2007). The Best Value in Formative
Assessment.Educational Leadership, 65(4), 14-19. Pink, D. (2010,
January 10). CBS Moneywatch [Personal interview].
