In my neck of the woods (which admittedly is pretty far from the metropolis) we think of grades in three forms: points, percentage, and letters. A few people use scales but that's not the purpose of this post.
I envision an ideal (and easiest for users to understand) scenario as 1) the real grade always reflects total points earned and 2) the max grade always reflects the actual maximum grade. Similarly range would be the actual range. Scaling of grades would only occur at the point where they are naturally needed (letters and percentages).
The fact that "real" doesn't reflect "real" in our users' minds is a drop-dead issue for us so this isn't just wishful thinking but is quite doable with a new report plugin(s) -- as I am doing. It just would be so much easier if there was something of a consensus out there and the whole gradebook thing could become simpler and more sustainable.
There is definitely some ambiguity in the term "Real Grade." Nomenclature is tough and every school uses different terminology, generally dictated by their previous LMS.
Nomenclature should be vetted at your school and voted on. Real Grades generally means points, but those points could be normalized depending on your aggregation method.
Like I said, ambiguity.
I would like to see the term changed based on your aggregation method. In SWM and WM, I'd like to see it as "Normalized Points" and in SUM I'd like it to be simply "Points," but neither is up to me.
Nomenclature should be vetted at your school and voted on. Real Grades generally means points, but those points could be normalized depending on your aggregation method.
Like I said, ambiguity.
I would like to see the term changed based on your aggregation method. In SWM and WM, I'd like to see it as "Normalized Points" and in SUM I'd like it to be simply "Points," but neither is up to me.
Thanks Robert for the well-informed comments.
I think from the student's POV "real" becomes a problem when it doesn't reflect the actual points. Introducing the "Normalized" adjective (or probably any other terminology) doesn't really get to the heart of one of the problems we experience with the current core gradebook -- i.e., under any aggregation scheme other than sum of points, a point isn't a point (and "sum of points" doesn't exclude non-graded items). I have Math professors wrestling with how to have their grades viewable to their students in an easily understood fashion. When they mess with the max grade for the category or course things go downhill fast.
Additionally, I find the storing of a grade in a calculated form fraught with perils. Everytime a change is made everything needs recalculation (as I'm sure you know since you've done a LOT of work on the gradebook) Admittedly I am hardly an expert... only one more campus administrator trying to meet the needs of his constituency as best as possible.
The user report plugin we're looking at introducing in January looks like this (note: any of the columns are removable by the instructor):
I think from the student's POV "real" becomes a problem when it doesn't reflect the actual points. Introducing the "Normalized" adjective (or probably any other terminology) doesn't really get to the heart of one of the problems we experience with the current core gradebook -- i.e., under any aggregation scheme other than sum of points, a point isn't a point (and "sum of points" doesn't exclude non-graded items). I have Math professors wrestling with how to have their grades viewable to their students in an easily understood fashion. When they mess with the max grade for the category or course things go downhill fast.
Additionally, I find the storing of a grade in a calculated form fraught with perils. Everytime a change is made everything needs recalculation (as I'm sure you know since you've done a LOT of work on the gradebook) Admittedly I am hardly an expert... only one more campus administrator trying to meet the needs of his constituency as best as possible.
The user report plugin we're looking at introducing in January looks like this (note: any of the columns are removable by the instructor):
To avoid normalized points and still get an accurate (read: not including zeros for non-available exams) running total a new aggregation method is needed.
I have proposed such an agg method and discussed it with my development team and we have concluded this will not be difficult at all.
We'll probably wait until 2.0 to implement if our faculty give us the go ahead. I believe this would make a great addition to core.
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=139311
I have proposed such an agg method and discussed it with my development team and we have concluded this will not be difficult at all.
We'll probably wait until 2.0 to implement if our faculty give us the go ahead. I believe this would make a great addition to core.
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=139311
We've also written a grade breakdown report that does exactly what you are illustrating above, for the student and all students based on grade for the instructor.
We'll make this available soon.
We'll make this available soon.
Bob
I wholeheartedly agree with you assessment!
To clarify I assume point 2 "maximum grade" means the total points possible? I think "grade" is another term that leads to some ambiguity so I just wanted to make sure I followed accurately...
I wholeheartedly agree with you assessment!
To clarify I assume point 2 "maximum grade" means the total points possible? I think "grade" is another term that leads to some ambiguity so I just wanted to make sure I followed accurately...
You got it.