top of page

Specs grading pt. 3 and an update

Writer's picture: Nicholas SheaNicholas Shea

Hi, all!


I had a few folks come up to me at SMT and tell me they enjoyed reading my blog posts about specifications grading (as dated as they are). I didn't think anyone would read these tbh, but I'm thrilled they're proving helpful to some! So with that in mind, I think it's time to 1) continue where I left off on describing specs grading, and 2) give a little update on the context in which I'm now using specs. Let's start with the latter.


Recently I was asked to revamp our Theory 4 Popular Music Analysis course to focus more on the "nuts and bolts" of popular-music music theory. We were doing seminar-style readings and deep analyses after a four-week review unit on fundamentals —formal function, meter/drum feels, modes and modal mixture, and so on— but despite this a conversation with our pop program director indicated she was worried students weren't well-enough acquainted with typical paradigms. So I decided to pivot and take these same fundamental concepts, but expand them toward greater breadth and depth. Luckily, Trevor de Clercq recently released his new textbook that does just that, so we've been testing it out. It's only the first week but so far so good! I was worried our in-class work (and subsequent homework) would be too tedious/obvious for students, but so far they seem to be enjoying the related conversations. For instance, Ch. 4 of The Practice of Popular Music is on simple forms and I thought surely this would be old news; instead, students seemed intrigued to find out that not all verses or choruses all simply 4/8/16 measures long.


Since my last post, I've also adopted specs in two other courses: Pedagogy of Music Theory, a graduate class required for our certificate students, and a brand-new course Advanced Form and Analysis, which is a mixed grad/undergrad seminar that focuses on applying central analytical techniques to larger spans of music. Both fit the specs model well, as I'll describe below, because they require demonstrating mastery by meeting more objectives across contrasting assessments (breadth) and/or going deeper into Bloom's Taxonomy on single assignments (depth). n.b., Brian Alegant has an excellent article on scuba diving versus snorkeling. Additionally, most of the assignments can (and optimally should) be graded on a binary: did the student effectively demonstrate their understanding/mastery of the concept at hand? This is where the pass/fail model comes into play.


Pass/fail grading

Traditional grading schemes are almost always a central point of anxiety amongst students. Let me paint a quick picture. I use ICAs (in-class assessments) to check student understanding about a week after a topic has been introduced. They're ungraded, about a half sheet in length, and are nearly identical in format to a subsequent graded quiz. Previously, students were assessed on a scale from 1–3: you totally got it (3), you technically passed but your understanding could be stronger (2), and you need to spend more time with this material (1). Students understand the scale and things are generally smooth. They also remark on my evaluations that they enjoy knowing where they stand. I also used the three-point system for graded quizzes. Students found it thoroughly demoralizing.  Panicked students would send me emails, sometimes during class, expressing their worries about how a 2/3 or a 66% might affect their grade. Their concerns seemed trivial to me, as the 10 quizzes across the semester make up only 5% of their total course grade, meaning each was worth less than .33 of a percentage point. (I also usually drop two of them.) I thought I was creating low-stakes scenarios to bolster morale. My students, on the other hand, experienced feelings of personal failure when earning a 2 out of 3.


It is nearly impossible for some students to disassociate a 66% or a D letter grade from failure due to the nature of traditional grading systems. A pass/fail model specifically anticipates this and other issues related to quantitative assessment. Nilson describes specs grading courses as “safe” because each evaluative activity is graded as pass/fail and the requirements for a passing grade are clearly stated from the start. Passing grades typically align with submissions that demonstrate B-level comprehension or above. In tandem, the scaffolded nature of most music theory courses means that the binary between pass/fail is all but essential for most concepts. Reflexive musical knowledge is essential in many performance and professional contexts. And on the instructor's side, many of us have likely encountered the uncomfortable scenario where a student technically reaches the 70% threshold for a passing grade, either on an assignment or across the entire course, but they have missed the mark on some essential concepts. With a sliding-scale quantitative grading system, there is nothing to be done but hope that your feedback motivates them to keep building their fluency in future semesters. The student has earned their C.


A pass/fail model combined with detailed specs derived from learning objectives helps to prevent this scenario; specifically, it removes the option of letting errors go unaddressed across assessments because submitted work is still “good enough” to earn a C or, inversely, creating a situation where students are fretting over potentially losing a trivial number of points and thus tanking their motivation. Pass/fail assessments provide a singular path forward, and that is submitting thorough work in good faith that has been double-checked against the specs.


Whew, this is getting a little long. I'll talk about grade tracks and tokens next time. For now I'll leave you with a simplified table of the tracks.






Requirements for each grade track


Earn Fail

Earn C

Earn B

Earn A

Unexcused absences

4+

3 or fewer 

3 or fewer 

3 or fewer 

Reading responses

2 per unit

3 per unit

4 per unit

all (15 total)

Assignments

2 or fewer

3

5

all (6 total)

Fluency assessments

Fail

Pass

Pass

Pass

Unit projects

2

3

3

Podcasts

0

0

0

2

 Assessment requirements for four grade tracks in a Theory 4 course.








5 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comentarios


© 2018 Nicholas Shea.

bottom of page