I do not like grading. The final papers, received en masse at the end, grow tedious. The brilliant insights seem banal. The fonts mock my headache. Mind you, I don't even have that many - just 15. To top it off, I am considered "easy". So, I am working on a tough, mean sneer while reading the papers. That will show them.
As a young teacher, I like to think that one's grade should reflect one's entire tenure in the class - with some points in reserve for the finals. I am not quite convinced it's the best way though. I experiment in every class: weekly responses, midterm, presentations, 2 papers, 1 paper submitted twice. For my next class, Introduction to Islamic History, I am thinking of Book Reports and online quizzes.
Anyways, I really should be getting back to grading.
My favorite format involved max 300 word analysis based on a tough, insightful question posed by the instructor of a particular reading. Works best when there are a menu of tough questions. And the 300 word limit makes grading easier and shows students how damn hard it is to write briefly.
For my assignments, I do prefer to give question to answer as opposed to free-wheelin' 300 word limit is an intriguing thought, though.... thanks
im telling you. next class. history of stuff thru buffy. it would make grading sooo much better. and then instead of A's and B's you can give like... 4 stakes... 3 stakes...
how about going all 'oral', as some students are not that good in expressing and writing down everything they understand,, ! here in scandanvia they perfer oral exams/presentations. As in , when you walk in, you draw one topic from the list of topics lying on the table. you show the topic to the sensor and the course instructor and you start off with an oral presentation about the topic. when you have nothing more to say: they start asking you questions and this whole thing takes not more than 30mins. the grading is like A,B,C,D...but in the end you are able to evaluate the student nearly 100%...