The Meaning of Marks
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9017757 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Robert M W Travers (corresponding author), Norman E Gronlund |
| Year | 1950 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 7 |
| Pages | 369-374 |
| Publication date | 1950-10-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Journal of Higher Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-1546 • E-ISSN: 1538-4640 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00221546.1950.11776045 |
| OpenAlex | W2318035812 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
T HE main purpose of recording marks in a central office in any college is to provide a record of the student's accomplishment. When the record shows that the student has achieved certain objectives, then his accomplishments are recognized b y the granting of a degree. Centrally recorded marks usually form part or all of the criterion used in the award of a degree at the graduate level, and degrees will be correctly granted in so far as marks represent a valid measure of success. The present writers became interested in the problem of defining a criterion of success in the Horace H. Rackham Graduate School of the University of Michigan in connection with studies of the value of tests and other instruments for predicting the student's career in graduate work. Unless the criterion is relatively free from arbitrary elements, predictions will be difficult, if not impossible, to make. The present investigation was designed to study the nature of the criterion used in awarding a degree in so far as it involves marks in class work. While the present study was conducted for the purpose of improving a local situation, it was thought that the results threw sufficient light on problems faced by other institutions to be of fairly wide interest. Early studies showed that marks assigned by one teacher did not agree closely with marks assigned by another to the same series of examinations. The results of such studies were often incorrectly interpreted as meaning that marks were unreliable. In most cases, however, different teachers were appraising different outcomes and agreement could not be expected. For example, in marking an examination in mathematics, one teacher might appraise the extent to which the student used a correct method for solving the problems, regardless of whether the answers to the questions were correct, while another teacher might score only for the correctness of the answers. Under such circumstances, one would not expect agreement between the marks assigned by one teacher and those assigned by another. If the expected outcomes of teaching are accurately defined, then teachers can in most instances agree rather closely on the marks to be assigned to examination papers, and this source of the unreliability of them can be largely eliminated. While teachers may disagree on the outcomes that should be measured in appraising the products of a student's labors, there is also another important source of variation in the meaning of
Class (philosophy · Degree (music · Mathematics education · Meaning (existential · Physics · Statistics · Value (mathematics · Accounting Education and Careers · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Educational Assessment and Pedagogy · Evaluation of Teaching Practices · Mathematics · Psychology
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,1 |
| Citation span | 1964 - 2002 (39) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |