NOT READY TO LET GO: A STUDY OF RESISTANCE TO GRADING CONTRACTS

Composition Studies, Spring 2006 by Spidell, Cathy, Thelin, William H

"When I first received my contract, I was unsure whether it was a good idea or not. Being only less than a month away before the semester ends, I still find my self in the same situation. All throughout life, we have repeatedly seen the grading system that is based on points rather than a contract that we sign at the beginning of the semester. This reappearance has gotten us accustomed to the grading system, which might cause the students to be a little critical to any type of change? (A first-year student response to the use of grading contracts as a pedagogical heuristic)

The impetus for using grading contracts in composition courses stems from two separate but complementary goals, represented through the theorizing and practice of Peter Elbow and Ira Shor. ' Elbow sees the grading contract as one way to "step outside of grading," as he sees serious flaws in concentrating on the quality of writing, what he calls indefinable "true excellence," as opposed to the meaning or the substance of any given paper (614). Such thoughts respond to the critique of grading set forward by Jerry Farber, who used contracts to undermine the "slave mentality" he believes traditional grading systems foster in students (136). Shor, on the other hand, views a grading contract as an early, necessary component in negotiating the curriculum with his students, the overall goal being for them to experience democracy in the classroom to aid in their development as responsible, empowered citizens (When Students 71-75). Marie Wilson Nelson tacitly supports Shor's views with her observation that the "choice of approach for assessment functions as a vote for or against democracy" (16).

With such student-friendly goals at their foundation, grading contracts would appear to be ideal for any classroom situation. Certainly under Elbow's method, students could see an instructor who has reflected deeply about the meaning of grades. In Shor's, students would have the opportunity for empowerment to make a classroom meet their needs. In both cases, students would have a better idea about what to expect and a firmer understanding of how to accomplish goals, which could lead to increased student motivation. Because student reaction to contract grading has been generalized from the teacher's perspective in college-level literature, we have limited understanding in the field of composition about students' perceptions of this form of grading.

While Hugh Taylor reviewed the existing research on contract grading in educational settings, he did not list one study involving the teaching of writing, and we could not find any other research bibliography compilation. Our field's knowledge about contract grading seems to be limited primarily to self-reporting from practitioners (see, e.g., Farber; Radican; Reichert; Shiffman; and Smith). With the exception of Shor, who narrates a re-creation of his classroom, student voices have often been absent from discussion of contract grading's success or failure. Shiffman, for instance, gives contract grading a "mixed review" and summarizes results from her experiences with it (67-68). She does not quote any student, though, and apparently bases her conclusions on her own impressions. She, like others, speaks for the students rather than letting their words start the conversation. To our knowledge, then, student reaction to contract grading has not been systematically tracked in a college-level composition course.

Wanting to learn more about how students experience grading contracts, we collected data from students in the classes of co-author Cathy Spidell, hereafter referred to as "teacher-researcher." The teacher-researcher enacted a contract system with goals rooted in Elbow's critique of grading but with a hint of the democratic possibilities of which Shor writes. As she wrote in her reflective journal:

I think students' obsession with "making the grade" has most of them involved in a tug-of-war-with themselves, with their peers, and with the instructor. This produces a counterproductive state that I cannot but help think is perpetuated via our traditional competitive educational system. Wouldn't it be great if I could loosen the hold that grades and learning apathy have on first-year college students? And counteract the ravaging effects of years of hegemonic and curricular control?

In keeping with Malcolm S. Knowles, the teacher-researcher hoped that the grading contracts would help students replace "conventional teacher-imposed discipline with self-discipline in the learning process [and] provide ... a way for the learner to obtain continual feedback about progress being made toward accomplishing learning goals" (46).2 She saw as an advantage that students would know from the start the specific goals of the class and the level of quality needed for each task. Students could plan their course work, prioritize, and avoid the ambiguity and pressure of grading, motives consistent with what Taylor believes contracts accomplish (17).