Adventures with Grading Contracts in Operations Classes: A Preliminary Investigation

References

• Arcidiacono P, Aucejo E, Hotz VJ (2016) University differences in the graduation of minorities in STEM fields: Evidence from California. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(3):525–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cangialosi K (2018) But you can’t do that in a STEM course! Hybrid Pedagogy 26.Google Scholar
• Chin MJ, Quinn DM, Dhaliwal TK, Lovison VS (2020) Bias in the air: A nationwide exploration of teachers’ implicit racial attitudes, aggregate bias, and student outcomes. Ed. Res. 49(8):566–578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clymer JB, Wiliam D (2006) Improving the way we grade science. Ed. Leadership 64(4):36.Google Scholar
• CSU (2022) Facts about the CSU. Accessed August 20, 2023, https://www.calstate.edu/csu-system/about-the-csu/facts-about-the-csu/Documents/facts2022.pdf.Google Scholar
• CSU (2023a) CSU mission. Accessed August 20, 2023, https://www.calstate.edu/csu-system/about-the-csu/Pages/mission.aspx.Google Scholar
• CSU (2023b) Graduation initiative 2025. Accessed August 20, 2023, https://www.calstate.edu/csu-system/why-the-csu-matters/graduation-initiative-2025.Google Scholar
• Dumas MJ (2016) Against the dark: Antiblackness in education policy and discourse. Theory Practice 55(1):11–19.Google Scholar
• Elbow P (1993) Ranking, evaluating, and liking: Sorting out three forms of judgment. College English 55(2):187–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Felder RM, Brent R (2005) Understanding student differences. J. English Ed. 94(1):57–72.Google Scholar
• Fitzmaurice O, Ní Fhloinn E (2021) Alternative mathematics assessment during university closures due to Covid-19. Irish Ed. Stud. 40(2):187–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graves BC (2023) Specifications grading to promote student engagement, motivation and learning: Possibilities and cautions. Assessing Writing 57:100754.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hiller TB, Hietapelto AB (2001) Contract grading: Encouraging commitment to the learning process through voice in the evaluation process. J. Management Ed. 25(6):660–684.Google Scholar
• Iannone P, Simpson A (2011) The summative assessment diet: How we assess in mathematics degrees. Teaching Math. Its Appl. 30(4):186–196.Google Scholar
• Inoue AB (2019) Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom (WAC Clearinghouse, Fort Collins, CO).Google Scholar
• Johnson MP, Chichirau GR (2020) Diversity, equity, and inclusion in operations research and analytics: A research agenda for scholarship, practice, and service. Pushing the Boundaries: Frontiers in Impactful OR/OM Research, INFORMS TutORials in Operations Research (INFORMS, Catonsville, MD), 1–38.Google Scholar
• Khan S (2015) Let’s teach for mastery: Not test scores. TED (November 2015), https://www.ted.com/talks/sal_khan_let_s_teach_for_mastery_not_test_scores?language=en.Google Scholar
• Kohn A (2011) The case against grades. Ed. Leadership 69(3):28–33.Google Scholar
• Loignon AC, Woehr DJ, Thomas JS, Loughry ML, Ohland MW, Ferguson DM (2017) Facilitating peer evaluation in team contexts: The impact of frame-of-reference rater training. Acad. Management Learn. Ed. 16(4):562–578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McMurtrie B (2022) Why the science of teaching is often ignored: There’s a whole literature on what works but it’s not making its way into the classroom. Chronicle Higher Ed. 68(10):22.Google Scholar
• Nagasaka K (2020) Multiple-choice questions in mathematics: Automatic generation, revisited. Proc. 25th Asian Tech. Conf. Math. Virtual Format (Radford, VA).Google Scholar
• National Research Council (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition (National Academies Press, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Nichols SL, Berliner DC (2007) The pressure to cheat in a high-stakes testing environment. Psychology of Academic Cheating (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 289–311.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Niss MA (1998) Dimensions of geometry and assessment. Perspective on the Teaching of Geometry for the 21st Century: An ICMI Study (Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York), 263–274.Google Scholar
• Previde P, Graterol C, Love MB, Yang H (2019) A data mining approach to understanding curriculum-level factors that help students persist and graduate. Proc. IEEE Frontiers Ed. Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 1–9.Google Scholar
• Ramsay‐Jordan NN, Appiagyei A, Kiel AD (2022) Productive interaction: An effective approach to addressing inequity in STEM. School Sci. Math. 122(6):283–285.Google Scholar
• Sangwin C (2013) Computer Aided Assessment of Mathematics (OUP Oxford).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santos MC (2022) How I implemented Asao B. Inoue’s labor-based grading and other antiracist assessment strategies. CEA Critic 84(2):160–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seymour E, Hewitt NM (1997) Talking About Leaving, vol. 34 (Westview Press, Boulder, CO).Google Scholar
• Shada A, Kelly K, Cox R, Malik S (2011) Growing a new culture of assessment: Planting ePortfolios in the metro academies program. Internat. J. ePortfolio. 1(1):71–83.Google Scholar
• Shankar NL, Park CL (2016) Effects of stress on students’ physical and mental health and academic success. Internat. J. School Ed. Psych. 4(1):5–9.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Son LK (2010) Metacognitive control and the spacing effect. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 36(1):255–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stommel J (2021) Ungrading: An introduction. Accessed June 18, 2024, https://www.jessestommel.com/ungrading-an-introduction/.Google Scholar
• Theobold AS (2021) Oral exams: A more meaningful assessment of students’ understanding. J. Statist. Data Sci. Ed. 29(2):156–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tobias S, Lin H (1991) They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different: Stalking the Second Tier (American Association of Physics Teachers, College Park, MD).Google Scholar
• Vlach HA, Sandhofer CM (2012) Distributing learning over time: The spacing effect in children’s acquisition and generalization of science concepts. Child Development 83(4):1137–1144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ward E (2021) Easing stress: Contract grading’s impact on adolescents’ perceptions of workload demands, time constraints, and challenge appraisal in high school English. Assessment Writing 48:100526.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watson EJ (2021) An Integrated Mixed-Methods Study of Contract Grading’s Impact on Students’ Perceptions of Stress, Self-Worth Protection Behaviors, and Academic Performance in High School English Courses (Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK).Google Scholar
• Winne PH, Azevedo R (2014) Metacognition. Sawyer RK, ed. The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, vol. 2 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 63–87.Crossref, Google Scholar