Reference table
How to evaluate a grading reform
A table for programme teams piloting ungrading, specifications grading or contract grading. For six questions a committee will ask, it sets what student evaluation scores can say against stronger evidence such as common assessments, resubmission rates, outcomes by student group and interviews. Use it to plan the evaluation before the pilot starts. Koji can run the mid-term and end-of-term student interviews.
What's in this reference table
| Question about the pilot | What the SET score says | Better evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Did students learn more? | Little: ratings track learning weakly | A common exam or blind-marked task, before and after |
| Did students use feedback? | Nothing directly | Revision and resubmission rates, office-hour use |
| Did stress go down? | Mixed with grade expectations | Students asked what changed, mid-term and at the end |
| Was it fair to every group? | An average hides groups | Pass and completion rates split by student group |
| Can staff sustain it? | Nothing | Marking hours logged across the term |
| Did students understand the rules? | Low scores may hint at it | Interviews on when students felt unsure where they stood |
Use this image
Free to use in your docs, decks and posts under CC BY 4.0, as long as you credit Koji with a link to this page. To embed it, paste this into your page:
html
<a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/grading-reform-evaluation-evidence-table"><img src="https://www.koji.so/visuals/grading-reform-evaluation-evidence-table/grading-reform-evaluation-evidence-table.png" alt="Table setting what a course evaluation score says about a grading reform against better evidence on learning, feedback use, stress, fairness and staff time." width="1200" height="824" /></a>
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/grading-reform-evaluation-evidence-table">How to evaluate a grading reform</a>, Koji</p>
