Last semester I had a student question the grading of their term project. The fact that the student had questions about their project grading was not a problem: I, like most professors, welcome grading questions if the student comes in with a constructive attitude. I never resent a student’s queries if the approach is based on ‘Can you help me understand my grade, and is there anything I can do to do better in the future?’ The resulting conversation may clarify the grading scheme and provide (hopefully) helpful advice on how to improve. Or perhaps a grading error will be identified that can be corrected. Either way, I think such an interaction, based on a constructive and proactive approach, can be positive and useful.
Unfortunately, a mutually-agreeable solution does not always emerge. In the case referred to above, the student approached me with a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of term projects, and no amount of explanation could satisfy this person. While I do not blame the student for having a point of view and for feeling strongly about an issue, their gap in understanding of how term projects are evaluated and their tenacity in avoiding acceptance of my clarification troubled me greatly. I hope that by outlining the basic issue and by offering my perspective, other students might avoid this problem.
The basic issue: the student received one grade on the presentation component of their project and a different grade on the written-report portion of the same project. The student’s assertion: ‘it is logically inconsistent for these two components of the same project to receive different grades.’
I’ll share two points that explain why the student’s assertion is false. First, oral presentations and written reports are distinctive endeavors, and one can be done well while the other can certainly be done poorly. Ideas that are readable in a written format might not come across effectively during an oral presentation. One can’t simply take a good report, read it out loud, and expect the audience to get the same message in both venues. Good writing and effective presentation are different skills, and time must be put into each as separate entities even if both arise from the same core research.
My second point focuses on mechanics: reports and presentations fundamentally differ in terms of the kind of information that can be effectively communicated. While there are important commonalities between a report and a presentation of the same research, the nature of the two formats demands tailoring the content to the unique strengths (and weaknesses) of the communication medium. For example, tables, charts, maps, and other graphics have a valid use in reports and presentations, but graphical material is particularly important in presentations. Members of our visual society, soaked in rich multimedia experiences, demand a high level of graphical material to maintain interest in a presentation. Presenters must understand the needs of the audience by providing items of visual interest, accompanied by concise language, to clearly present their message. On the other hand, the report, by its nature, allows for extended detail and discussion. Reports are organized within the general framework of paragraphs and pages, while these days presentations are organized by PowerPoint slide. One format encourages discussion and reflection, while the other demands clarity and brevity.
Students would do well to think about the inherent limitations and strengths of reports and presentations, and to plan accordingly. That being said, professors also know that effective communication and choices required to write and/or present are challenging. That is, communication of research is an art form that requires practice. We’d rather see you earlier in the research process, when you can still change things, rather than at the last minute after panic has set in, when changes are tough to make. Our happiness to help often depends on a student’s willingness to approach us early in the research process.
0 comments:
Post a Comment