2005 OPEN FORUM Abstracts
GRADING POLICY: CONSISTENCY, FAIRNESS OR ACCURACY?
Arzu Ari, Ph.D, MS, CRT, CPFT Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA
Introduction: Procedures for evaluating grading policy vary among respiratory therapy schools and it is understandable that grading policy of instructors needs to be carefully monitored. Many colleges and universities have used student ratings as one measure of grading policy (D'Appolonia & Abrami, 1997). Therefore, two important research questions arose within the context of this study: (1) What is the relationship between the grading policy and the overall grade of instructors?, and (2) What factors of the grading policy predict the overall grade of instructors?
Method: The Department of Cardiopulmonary Care Sciences at Georgia State University uses a survey instrument with a Likert scale (1=Poor, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Good, 4=Excellent) for student evaluation of grading policy. During the 3 year-period (1999-2002), a total of 241 surveys were given to students and 211 surveys were returned for an 87% response rate. Responses were analyzed using SPSS for Windows. Pearson product-moment correlations and multiple regression analysis at a 0.05 level of significance were utilized to address the research questions in this study.
Results: Pearson correlations indicated that consistency and fairness had a statistically significant positive relationship with the overall grade of instructors (p< 0.05). Regression analysis showed that the consistency and fairness had a significant impact on overall grade of the instructor (p< 0.05). Consistency accounted for 51.4% of the variance in codependency at the first step of the model, and fairness entered the equation by adding R2 change of 1.6% to the model. These variables accounted for 53% of the total variance (R2).
Conclusion: Fairness and consistency make a significant impact on the overall grade of instructors. Therefore, respiratory therapy instructors can use these variables in order to enhance the grading policy of their institutions.
Reference: D'Appolonia, S. & Abrami, P.C. (1997). Navigating student ratings of instruction. American Psychologist, 52 (11), 1198.