In my first year as Head of Mathematics, a couple of older members of my staff felt that some of the less experienced Mathematics teachers were rating the assessment items as “easy,” giving their students better grades than they should be receiving. . This posed problems for students competing for university places, especially in the after-school type. The better the grade obtained in Mathematics, the greater the possibility of accessing the genre after the courses.
To solve the problem, I established a procedure for instructors to follow to give credence to the idea that grading on assessment tasks was consistent across classes. Each level course or Mathematics subject had a unit coordinator who was in charge of writing the evaluation tasks and organizing their correction. The coordinator was responsible for implementing the following procedure.
The procedure was as follows:
- Each unit coordinator would provide teachers with a detailed grading scheme/grading criteria.
- This marking scheme was required all the staff.
- If any issues arise, the unit coordinator was to issue a new detailed grading scheme taking into account any new alternative solutions/approaches. (Problem solving/critical thinking/higher order thinking questions often lead to alternative solutions).
- The markings on the parts must be respected, as indicated.
- Students may solve the problem in a different way or use a different approach. If it is correct and does not contravene any instructions, full marks should be awarded.
- The exam paper marking would be divided into several parts and a teacher would mark one part of each student’s exam paper. This would create consistency in the scoring of each part of the exam.
- For assignments as homework, one person would mark assessment assignments for all students in the cohort. This type of marking would be shared among staff throughout the year.
- When criteria were used to assess assignments, teachers should check only those criteria.
- The criteria for problem solving/critical thinking/higher order thinking questions, written in the assessment task, should be general in nature. The criteria to be used should only be included in the grading scheme that is given to the instructor to grade the item(s). The particular criteria printed on the assessment task could lead the students towards a solution.
- Each coordinator must ensure that copies of the final versions of the markscheme/marking criteria are stored with the assessment tasks in the official files.
- The Head of Department must be informed of any problems as soon as possible so that they can be resolved and allow the marking to be completed quickly.
This procedure was printed in the staff manual. When the procedure came into use, it actually reduced teachers’ grading workload. Scoring one section of each student’s exam was much faster than scoring all of his students’ questions. The teacher had to remember less. There was less page turning and teachers were able to spot mistakes quickly and easily recognize alternative solutions. The correction teacher could pass information to colleagues on areas that were not well understood and needed to be reviewed in class. Teachers quickly adopted the system.