As teachers, we all know it is important for students to participate in class. This is because the best way for students to learn is to actually interact with the material being taught. Therefore, the best way for students to learn is to participate in class. Student participation is the gateway to helping students learn content, so it is best that we encourage all students to participate in class discussions so the understand the content. Although it is imperative that all students participate in class, should they really be told how to participate in class? Should a student really lose points for not participating in the way the teacher wants them to participate? As teachers, we should assess students based on their understanding of a particular subject. With participation grades, I feel like we are grading students on doing something rather than assessing mastery of a particular subject or skill.
When I would get a grade on participation in high school and got a grade less than 100%, I never understood why. On my progress report, I would see that I got a 90% even though I definitely participated in class. I shared my thoughts during warm-ups and during class discussion. I participated almost every day and I only got a 90%. No one ever explained to me why I only got a 90% for just contributing to classroom discussion. As a teacher, whether you believe in classroom participation grades or not, you should always tell the students the criteria they are being graded on for class participation. How could students know how to participate in class if the teacher does not explain what is expected? With all this said, here is an analysis of the pros and cons of grading on classroom participation. After the analysis, I will provide my own reflection on classroom participation.
Pros of Grading on Classroom Participation
The most obvious incentive to grade students on classroom participation is to motivate students to participate in class. Like I said before, students learn best when they are actively engaged in their learning, and participation in lessons shows that students are learning. Therefore, teachers can motivate students to participate with a good grade. This way, students can participate in their learning and receive the grade to reflect their participation. In the article, The “Participation” Grade, Professor Joyelle Harris states that participation grades offer “an instant reward for their effort [to] learn the material instead of just trying to earn the grade” (qtd. in Grusky, McTighe, and O’Connor 2014). In other words, participation grades act as a component of learning as a whole: mastery and participation to achieve mastery. The way I see this, grading based on participation assesses students’ ability to take those steps to achieve mastery. In other words, it serves as a motivator to help students get involved with their learning to achieve mastery.
In the article, Grusky, McTighe, and O’Connor also point out that classroom participation grade supporters will point out that participation and mastery of class material have a strong correlation (2014). Like I pointed out before, learning can be broken down into two components: mastery and participation to achieve mastery. Therefore, when teachers grade their students, they are grading them on the learning process as a whole rather than just what they have learned. For this reason, the grade students receive on classroom participation should reflect the grades students receive on any graded work they receive that tests a student’s mastery. It would make sense that if a student is participating in class, he or she would have a better grasp on the material being taught because he or she is contributing to discussion or asking questions about misunderstandings. Therefore, when being formally assessed on the material, the student should be able to do well and receive a good overall grade.
Of course, participation grades are not always based solely on participating on classroom discussion and activity. They are also based on turning in homework assignments, preparation for school, warm-ups, or exit tickets. In other words, when you do your homework and come to class with everything you need, that is part of your participation grade. This is a better definition of the criteria needed to receive an A in participation because it shows that the student is participating in class to achieve mastery of the material. If you are taking initiative to achieve mastery of the material, you will receive a good participation grade. You are taking the initiative to do the homework and come to class prepared; therefore, you should achieve success in achieving mastery and as a result, achieve a good participation grade. Now, I want to talk about warm-ups and exit tickets. Some teachers use these as participation grades rather than grades for formal assessments. In other words, if you answer the prompt on a warm-up or an exit ticket, you will receive a grade for participation. Because these are usually questions to get students thinking about the material at the beginning or end of a lesson, and they have no right or wrong answer; this makes sense because teachers cannot really give students a bad grade on a student’s thinking unless it is totally irrelevant to the topic. It shows more thought or participation about the content rather than mastery of the material itself. That’s why some teachers grade them as participation grades rather than formal assessments.
Cons of Grading on Classroom Participation
As I said before, learning can be defined into two different components: mastery and participation to achieve mastery. While it is important that students participate in class, most teachers’ objectives are not related to participation. In other words, teachers’ objectives are more based on whether students can achieve mastery of a particular subject or skill rather than how they participated in that subject or skill. When you calculate a student’s average, it should measure a student’s achievement in a particular subject. In other words, when you calculate a students’ average, it should take into account all assessments related to that subject. If that is the case, participation seems unrelated to that subject. For example, if you give a student a grade in math, any and all assessments calculated into a student’s average should be related to math. If a teacher grades a student on participation, they are only grading the student’s ability to contribute to discussion on math rather than their understanding of math itself. The teacher could have a student who can perform very well in math, but they do not participate in class; thus, the student’s average is brought down because of participation. Because of that deduction of a student’s average because of class participation, the reflection of that student’s ability seems slightly inaccurate.
Perhaps one of the biggest problems with grading on classroom participation is that a teacher may have a student who is reluctant to participate in class. The student may be too shy or self-conscious to participate in class. Therefore, it penalizes the student just because he or she does not want to participate. While it is important that these students should participate in classroom discussion so the teacher knows they have an understanding of the material, they should not be forced to participate in class if they do not want to share their thoughts. Maybe the teacher should check with them frequently during class discussion, but the teacher should not force them to talk. Opponents of grading based on participation would say that this not only forces students to speak when they do not want to, but it penalizes them for not speaking in class. Students should never be forced to do something they do not want to do. That could make them feel uncomfortable, and teachers should always make their students feel comfortable in class. Also, if these students understand the material, but they do not want to participate in class, they get a deduction in their grade for simply not participating when they have a full understanding of the material. This goes back to my first con of participation grades. It does not seem fair that students are getting penalized for not wanting to speak in class.
“Just because two sources of evidence are related does not mean they measure the same thing” (Thomas R. Guskey, Jay McTighe, and Ken O’Connor 2014)
Supporters of participation grades say that there is a strong correlation between participation and mastery. Indeed, if students are participating in class discussion by offering input or asking questions, they should have a better understanding of the material because they are active in their learning. However, as I said before, mastery and participation are two separate components of learning as a whole. While they both contribute to the learning process, they are not the same thing. As I said, when teachers calculate their students’ average, the average should take mastery into account more than participation. Therefore, participation should account for no more than 10% of a student’s grade because grades are intended to measure what students know about a particular subject and not how they participated in class to learn the material.
Reflection
I chose to write my first blog post on this topic because it was always something I felt strongly about, and I revisited the topic while I was reading a book in which the main character is a teacher who gives students journal entry assignments and grades them as participation grades. As a preservice teacher, I always cringed at the idea of grading students on participation. While I still prefer not to grade my students on the basis of participation, I have a better understanding of teachers who use participation as a grade. Of course, I want all my students participating in class, but I do not think grading them on participation in classroom discussion is an accurate assessment of how my students master the content being taught to them. I do not think I would grade students on the basis of classroom participation in classroom discussion because I feel like there is no clear criteria to tell how well a student participated in my class unless I created a rubric, which I feel is unnecessary. However, if I am required to grade on the basis of participation, I like using warm-ups and exit tickets as participation grades rather than formal assessments. I like this idea because it shows that my students were thinking about what was being taught before and after the lesson, and there is no right or wrong answer. It is just a platform that allows my students to think about the content; in other words, it shows that my students are participating in understanding the content. As for preparation for class, it would be up to my students to problem-solve to prepare themselves to achieve the objective for the day. Therefore, I would not grade whether or not they were prepared for class part of a participation grade. I also like the idea of including homework in the participation grade, but in some districts, that may have to be a separate grade.
Of course, classroom participation grades are more common in the secondary classroom, and I am an elementary school teacher, but this is still something on which upper elementary students can be graded, especially in departmentalized upper elementary schools. With that said, I think it is important to teach elementary students the importance of participating in classroom discussion and activities because they might be graded on it when they get to middle school; high school; and especially college, but we should not grade them on it. The teacher should clearly state the expectations for all students to participate, but the pressure of a grade for participation is too much for elementary school students; it is especially too much for students in the primary grades. At the same time, even in the primary grades, the teacher should encourage all students to participate in class discussions and activities. Like I said, if I am required to have a participation grade if I am teaching upper elementary school, I would use warm-ups and exit tickets as such grades while encouraging them to participate in class discussion informally.
As I implied before, some school districts require participation grades, so there is not much teachers can do if they do not want to grade their students on classroom participation. In the article, Guskey; McTighe; and O’Connor state that “[they] believe that [the dilemma of a classroom participation grade] is a system problem rather than a teacher’s dilemma” (2014). In other words, even though a teacher may not believe in classroom participation grades, they still may be required to grade students on classroom participation because of district requirements. I would suggest that if that is the case, it is probably best to make participation grades measure the content being taught as much as possible. In other words, participation grades should be as closely related to content as much as possible. Like I said, I would use warm-ups and exit tickets to assess student participation to get students thinking about content. I would also use homework because that is student participation in content at home (of course, this implies that the district does not also require a homework grade).
References:
Guskey, T. R., McTighe, J., & O’Connor, K. (2014). The “Participation” Grade. ASCD Express, 10(7). Retrieved January 17, 2019, from http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/vol10/1007-guskey.aspx
What do you think of classroom participation grades? Comment below or send me a message on the Contact page. Also, if you like this post, share it on social media!
