Over the last few days, I have been considering the twice-a-year obligation that we have to grade examinations. (Thinking about grading exams is certainly more enjoyable than actually doing it). I have yet to meet any colleague who enjoys grading; indeed, most of us seem to treat it as the most loathsome part of our jobs. Why?
For those of us who teach larger classes, I suspect some of the dread stems from the idea of having to read the same answer (or at least what should be the same answer) time after time after time. Certainly, in the years where I’ve had over a hundred students in my Introduction to Property course, this has been a significant factor. How many of us would go to the same movie or read the same novel a hundred times? But repetition cannot be the only explanation — I also teach much smaller classes and don’t enjoy the grading any more.
Grading can also expose the fact that there is a difference between teaching and learning. I have not found it uncommon to read an answer and wonder whether the student ever came to class or read the materials. “Executory vested remainder” can never be the correct answer to any question on a Property exam as no such thing exists. At the same time, all of us know that not everyone who attends law school should be doing so. Finding the occasional failure among the examinations should be unfortunate, but should not trigger such dread. Also, you would expect this to be more relevant for introductory classes rather than more advanced ones whose members have already shown some competence. Fearing student failure cannot be the full reason, for our grading discomfort, therefore.
The last reason I’ve come up with is one of potential misdirection. When we grade an examination and find it wanting, are we also saying something about our inability to teach? While, like most other professors, I can articulate many reasons why students’ failures are their own responsibility, maybe the dread of grading we feel originates with a feeling that it is our failing not the student’s.
So, assuming that you also dislike grading, do you have a reason?
For those of us who teach larger classes, I suspect some of the dread stems from the idea of having to read the same answer (or at least what should be the same answer) time after time after time. Certainly, in the years where I’ve had over a hundred students in my Introduction to Property course, this has been a significant factor. How many of us would go to the same movie or read the same novel a hundred times? But repetition cannot be the only explanation — I also teach much smaller classes and don’t enjoy the grading any more.
Grading can also expose the fact that there is a difference between teaching and learning. I have not found it uncommon to read an answer and wonder whether the student ever came to class or read the materials. “Executory vested remainder” can never be the correct answer to any question on a Property exam as no such thing exists. At the same time, all of us know that not everyone who attends law school should be doing so. Finding the occasional failure among the examinations should be unfortunate, but should not trigger such dread. Also, you would expect this to be more relevant for introductory classes rather than more advanced ones whose members have already shown some competence. Fearing student failure cannot be the full reason, for our grading discomfort, therefore.
The last reason I’ve come up with is one of potential misdirection. When we grade an examination and find it wanting, are we also saying something about our inability to teach? While, like most other professors, I can articulate many reasons why students’ failures are their own responsibility, maybe the dread of grading we feel originates with a feeling that it is our failing not the student’s.
So, assuming that you also dislike grading, do you have a reason?
The penchant for posting about the hardships of grading at this time of year, when students are recovering but anxiously waiting for their results, is understandable but regrettable.
Consistent with that reaction, you've missed at least one obvious one: that grading involves inflicting hurt by assigning grades that disappoint or otherwise harm students. To paraphrase Cover, "Grading takes place in a field of pain and death. Putting Yale aside."
Posted by: Ed | December 21, 2012 at 03:52 PM
I think grading is the worst part of the job for two major reasons. First, we have fantastic jobs with otherwise very little drudgery. And second, the stress of grading can be intense: We are failing our students if we do not give them the most accurate grades we can, so we get stressed out by the need to do the best possible job. (The irony is that the professors who don't care so much about their students' futures can grade very quickly, which leads them to hand in grades sooner, which makes students happy.)
Posted by: Yet Another Law Prof | December 21, 2012 at 04:51 PM
I think Yet Another's second point is very true. I hadn't really thought about it, but I will sit down with almost every student and do an exam review. The stress of wanting to be able to justify the grading is a clear contributor to the unpleasantness of the job.
Posted by: Ralph D. Clifford | December 21, 2012 at 04:57 PM
With the caveat that I very much take the point that grading exams is not as stressful or unpleasant as taking exams at least often is. . . .
In addition to what has already been said (it's hard work because it's important to get it right, so one needs to pay very close attention and try hard to be consistent; you will be delivering bad news to some folks, which doesn't make anyone happy; and reading bad exams can make teachers question whether they are competent teachers), I will also note that there is pretty much no positive feedback for doing this job well. Deans and colleagues may commend faculty on good publishing, good service, or good teaching (as evidenced by evaluations, awards, or student comments). Students can give rewarding feedback about classroom teaching, or activities outside the classroom. But nobody ever says, "hey, good job grading--really fair, accurate and consistent!" There's no reward for doing it well, although there can be negative consequences for doing it badly. And you know a significant chunk of folks (those with grades lower than they expected/think they deserve) will be unhappy with the results of your work no matter how well you do it.
I don't mean to sound whiny. Law teaching is a great job. But grading is the worst part of it.
Posted by: Joseph Slater | December 21, 2012 at 05:21 PM
....because it is work.
Posted by: anymous | December 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM
Boredom. Knowing some students will be disappointed. And as Joe says, it's a thankless task.
Posted by: Miriam Cherry | December 23, 2012 at 02:41 PM
Another possible source of frustration is the recognition that many of the best exams will not belong to students who have demonstrated over the course of the semester their grasp/sophistication/mastery/passion for a subject. That reminder - that exam performance may, at times, have an inverse relationship to in-class performance - is, for me at least, disheartening.
Posted by: Taja-Nia Henderson | December 23, 2012 at 02:52 PM
In response to Taja-Nia's concerns (and I second those concerns), I do think it's really important that we do our best to teach our students exam technique during the semester. When I was in Australia teaching, we had the luxury of the "lecture + tutorial" system so the tutors could focus a lot on exam-problem-solving technique on a weekly basis which would help students who had a great grasp of the material to translate their thoughts into meaningful exam responses. I think the "inverse relationship" problem is often the result of poor exam technique even when good students understand the material.
Posted by: Jacqueline Lipton | December 28, 2012 at 09:35 AM