VOLUME XIII, NUMBER 12

8 INNOVATION ABSTRACTS.

ETM ST aA AV MON Ueto 2 OHGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISOD),COLLEGE OF EDUCATION,»
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN WITH SUPPORT FROM THE,W. K. KELLOGG FOUNDATION AND THE:SI0 W. RICHARDSON FOUN

An Evaluation Problem: Class Participation

Instructors often take student effort or class partici-
pation into account as a specific point value in the
computation of a final course grade. Indeed, every
instructor has an opinion about students participating
in class—even if we admit it only to ourselves.

In the Physical Therapist Assistant Program at
Housatonic Community College, | have coaxed, cajoled,
and, in desperation, required students to “actively
participate” in learning. To my dismay, I found that my
estimations of participation were often at odds with
those of my students. I also found that my opinions
were frequently based on subjective rather than verifi-
able data, and limited by my own ability to remember
who spoke up in class (difficult during lively discus-
sions) or who appeared for (instructor-set) office hours.

In response to this dilemma, | have attempted to
incorporate more objective methods of evaluating class
participation. While the primary goal of these methods
was to improve the fairness of my grading, I also
wanted to use methods that would foster team building,
encourage networking, and teach siudents that partici-
pation means more than simply standing up in front of
the class.

SUT Es

Included here are some of the techniques that do not
require students to speak up in class and can be gener-
alized to any curriculum.

1. Bookmarks: For each chapter of text assigned as
reading, students receive an index card to use as a
bookmark. On this card they write their questions
about specific passages, conflicts with lecture notes,
and so forth. If they have no questions, they are to
write a test question and answer. Cards are submit-
ted each week, and questions are answered either in
writing or during the first few minutes of class (as
time permits). A grade may or may not be assigned,
but each submission is worth a specified percentage
of the participation grade.

2. Student Outlines: Those students who use outlines
of text chapters or lectures sign up as a group and

take turns preparing each outline. Students who sign
up must prepare equal numbers of outlines, which I
correct and share with the group. Students benefit
by refining their outlining technique, checking their
information, and learning to cooperate. This activity
is extra credit for participation, as not all students
choose to participate.

. Class-Generated “Crib Sheets”: Before tests,

students generate “crib sheets.” I review them for
thoroughness and emphasis, sharing my findings
with the entire class. Occasionally, with a very
cohesive class, we vote on the best, and I award extra
points. No sheets are allowed during the test, but ali
make excellent study tools.

. Term Paper Critiques: When papers are assigned, a

timeline is provided for specific steps. Students may
request instructor feedback at any point in the
process without affecting their grades. On the date
the rough draft is due, each student brings in a copy
of his or her own paper and exchanges with another
student. Each student must read and critique
another's paper (called a Peer Critique). Each review
is graded for thoroughness, fairness, and clarity-——
while the papers themselves are not graded or even
seen by the instructor. A copy of the corrected
review is then sent to both the reviewer and the
paper’s author. Students learn to be more cautious in
interpreting research data, become more comfortable
with their own papers, and benefit from the research
of their peers. (An aside: I now get fewer late
papers!)

. Doing It Wrong: Since many health care classes

include laboratory periods for practice of clinical
skills, videotapes often help convey what lectures
cannot. After showing a professionally made but
terrible video, I realized that students loved being
able to critique this anonymous person and suggest
ways that the actors could have done it better. now
let small groups of students make up vignettes—
complete with mistakes! The actors and production
staff receive credit for a list of planned mistakes.
These “shorts” have enabled students to work
together (often with new and unfamiliar equipment)

INSIDE DOUGLAS COLLEGE / August 20, 1991

 

 

THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISOD)
Community College Leadership Program, Department of Educational Administration
College of Education, The University of Texas at Austin, EDB 348, Austin, Texas 78712