I’ve had great success with allowing unlimited re-tests (until the end of the grading period), with a maximum re-test grade of 90%.
The pros for me are:
- It sends students the message that they’re encouraged to keep working on mastering the material.
- It defines an “A” in terms of individual mastery of the material, not as a comparison with other students.
- It sends parents the message that if their kids haven’t earned an A, the onus is on the student, not the teacher.
- It provides a stock answer to “what can I do to improve my grade”.
- It gives many students a believable path to success. (I’ve found that the belief factor is one of the larest obstacles.)
In a similar vein, I allow students to earn 70% of the credit for late work (even major assignments, and even if they’re egregiously late). (Note that I use a multiplier rather than a cutoff.) By high school, most students have long since acquired any educational value that receiving a zero might give. Beyond that lesson, I feel that there’s always more educational value in doing an assignment than there is in receiving a zero for not doing it, and the grading policy should therefore always continue to provide incentive to do the assignment. I’ve tried different percentages, and for me, 70% seems to be the sweet spot.
I dislike traditional “extra credit” assignments because:
- They encourage belief in rewards for quantity of time spent rather than quality of work/understanding.
- They tend to be boring to read and highly subjective (read: time-consuming) to grade.
Originally posted to the ChemEd-L discussion list.
