The Columbia College Student Experience: Grades: Should they be effort based, or results based?

I think that in the film and video classes, a rule of no late work accepted is important. (sans a real emergency)

Because, in the real world, there are deadlines and there are no excuses. Particularly in classes that do not require much work.

Effort is in the eye of the beholder. It can not be measured in a reliable way from student to student. 'Working harder' does not mean a student 'understands' a subject any better. Perhaps because he/she is 'working harder' means a lack of comprehension (which could mean a myriad of things). Airlines don't hire pilots because they 'work harder', they hire them because of proven, successful tested abilities. A lifeguard does not get to save lives because he/she works harder---you get my drift... We base receiving a good grade on knowledge, understanding, ability to apply subject, and successful testing outcomes in relation to, and what is demanded at any particular grade level. An 'A' signifies excellence whether one is talented or not, came easily, or hard. A 'D' is unsatisfactory even if a student worked hard. Too much PC here. If one is not cut out to do something, that's life. Figure out what your strong suits are, and breeze through with 'A's. Especially with art, you either got it or don't. A talented artist will always get the easy 'A' over the less talented one, who works hard as hell, and can only pull off a 'C'. It's innate. Again, that's life.

I feel success can be defined in many ways, but for me taking a test does not characterize my knowledge or intelligence. Hence, why I'm at a liberal arts college. I feel that the program I'm in, Fiction Writing, judges by effort (except for a selected few teachers who are absolutely stuck on themselves). But when I take a class outside of my department, I find myself struggling slightly only because some classes are more traditional. Meanwhile, eighty percent of all my classes are bullshit information I have to weed through in order to define myself, to get that degree that says I know what I'm talking about when it comes to my skill. Lastly, I find that some teachers like to mold you into their style, not yours. If you know what I'm talking about, you should be sure to fight against it. I think the entire education machine should be revolutionized.

I have to agree with Brad; the overlap is incredible.

I try to have students demonstrate an awareness of process so that the effort can be something that is HIGHLY factored into the grade. However, asking for this level of process detail often makes students think they are "being asked to do another thing."

In actuality, I am asking for a student to look at what he/she is doing and begin to see the patterns, methods, even materials being employed. I am asking a student to be mindful.

This could be as simple as a reflection paper or as complicated and drawn out as an artist's notebook. It doesn't matter, but I expect to see some act of pilgrimage, some act of making that takes more than one "insta-step."

Most artists will tell you that the art they can make, even the art they can make in the matter of a few seconds, is based on ideas and issues that have been culminating in their minds. So, daydreaming can be an act of effort and process, but I can't assess that unless you show me an awareness of how that daydream assisted you.

In my "art-ier" classes, students mention that they cannot clarify their process--as if it is mystical or divine. And while I understand that "out of body experience" that happens in the process of making something, I also understand that it takes work to acheive that. In fact, to be "not present" in the art making is probably to be most fully present. Atheletes and performers call this the "white moment."

Part of the problem with this discussion, in my opinion, is that "effort" and "outcomes" are not two different things. They actually overlap in some pretty complex ways.

Learning and knowing are activities, not things. And outcomes are actually specific kinds of effort that we teachers want to see our students enact.

Even in classes that seem to have pretty straightforward outcomes (like math) you're still producing an effort. The efforts for a math class might be something like, "given a mathematical problem, can you identify an appropriate formula to help you find a solution?"; "can you accurately apply addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc. to solve the problem?"; something like that.

What I see from time to time is that students are applying the wrong type of effort to my class. That is, a student might put forth a lot of effort, but he/she is not applying the type of effort that the class is designed to teach--a student who diligently summarizes a text instead of critiquing and analyzing might be an example. That situation can be immeasurably frustrating for both professors and students.

If you're wondering what kinds of effort your professor is looking for, just take a look at your syllabus. Usually they're listed under "learning objectives," "course outcomes," or some other similar heading.

Create and document efforts that fulfill the criteria listed there, and you should be fine.

outcome is the only true measurable, but of course it is always going to be somewhat subjective. I use a criteria for success in grading each project, so the student knows ahead what i expect. my favorite criteria-usually 20% of the grade is for "overall gestalt" where i count creativity, unity and overall cohesion.

As faculty I think the question of outcome vs. effort relies on a common understanding of what these terms mean and I don't believe there is any. For me a student's grade is a measure of what they have learned and that is always based on assessment of outcome not effort. All our curriculum goals relate to student learning because all the effort in the world doesn't guarantee a student has learned anything. Outcome does reflect how much a student has learned. Faculty can look at a student's output at the end of the semester and have a sense of what and how much the student learned. Effort however is almost impossible to judge since there isn't anything inherent in a student's work that would demonstrate the effort involved. And when students say "effort” they often mean "time spent working" which isn't the same thing.

I also doubt that students would be happy with a system based in whole or part on effort. A more talented student may spend much less effort than a lesser student to achieve good work. Should they receive the same grade or should the lesser student get a higher grade because they put in more effort? And does the amount of effort indicate the quality of effort? What role does thought play in all this? Does the amount of time spent thinking about a class assignment count as effort? And how should this all be factored into the grade?

Grading is the one thing most college faculty would like to eliminate because it is difficult to make any assessment of a student, then rate it on a scale of one to fine. Rather than debate outcome vs. effort perhaps we should be discussing better means of assessing student learning.

I hate grading and prefer a pass/fail system; however, I try to use grades to motivate learning. Further, students are graded objectively on: attendance, an email assignment, class discussion, an oral presentation, a journal (reflecting on required film viewing or reading), 2 papers and 2 tests. I believe that punctuality, reliability and meeting deadlines are valuable aspects of one's college education, no matter what career is pursued.

It's impossible to know how much effort a person puts into writing a paper or studying for a test. Effort to me translates into class attendance, class participation, reliability, meeting deadlines, and following basic directions. Tests are graded in an objective manner and relate directly to material covered in class and readings. As a professional writer, I'm able to judge paper's worth. Finally, I grade on improvement for 1st to 2nd paper and from 1st to 2nd test.

I am an instructor and I get a mixed sense from Columbia students about how they regard grading.
Some seem utterly unconcerned about it and some seem obsessed. I am more inclined to identify with and cater to the students who are obsessed by the idea of earning a particular grade. I try to make my grading criteria and expectations absolutely crystal clear so that if they want an A, they know precisely how to earn it (effort, participation, quality of work, meeting deadlines, meaningful collaboration with peers, asking intelligent questions...).
I see a correlation between the student who pays attention to my grading practices and his or her academic success. But maybe I need to find new ways to measure 'academic success' for Columbia students who maintain different standards.
A former boss once told me that teachers waste time when they worry about 'reforming' or 'saving' dedicated C students. Some 'average' students (in terms of grading) are quite content with that status and it might be counterproductive and possibly offensive to expect that each student strives for an A. That's hard for teachers to swallow, though, when we assume it's our job to help every student reach the highest level of achievement possible.
On another note, I do believe that teachers can accurately measure effort. We tend to match our energy and time to our students' energy and output. The students who consistently show up late, don't speak or hand in late or underdone work simply don't earn as much of my time in responding to their work as their more communicative and energetic peers. It's too bad that that's true but I wish students knew that about teachers. We tend to have pretty accurate 'effort' radar, I think. I'm glad that we're all engaging in this important dialogue.

Interesting exchange. I would point out that instructors have no real way of measuring effort, per se. How does one quantify or evaluate "effort"? If I am teaching a writing class, for example, I usually don't have a truly reliable or fair way to differentiate between the amount of effort put into writing the two-page paper submitted by Student A as compared to the same assignment completed by Student B.

Instructors need to be careful when grading for "effort," as personalities (introverted vs. extroverted), cultural backgrounds, and social skills directly affect--perhaps unfairly--teacher perception of student engagement.

As a faculty member, I believe in a holistic and appropriate combination of demonstrated effort and results, depending, of course, on the nature of the class and the stated goals and learning outcomes.

Some courses, by nature/goals/learning outcomes, require assessment that is results-based (students must demonstrate that they have mastered a a knowledge, a technique of techniques. Other courses, by nature/goals/learning outcomes, suggest assessment that is based not only on results, but effort and process. The latter considers final results, but also takes into account the individual: at what level did a student begin at? what level did the student attain? how much growth/stretch/progress/thought/reach/challenge was exhibited?

Most of my courses have fallen into the latter category, which, I must admit, is as challenging to to me as it is, often, maddening to students.

I think the real questions here are: Are students clearly and adequately informed by syllabi and faculty and departments of the rubrics by which they will be graded? Are those rubrics appropriate for the class? Are they fairly applied?

Philosophically and pedagogically, I like the "progressive" idea of pass/fail as opposed to letter grades. Realistically, though, this can often present problems to students who seek to transfer to other institutions or to apply for graduate/advanced studies.

In a grade-letter-based system, we should all (students and faculty) remind ourselves of the definitions (in this day of grade inflation and students'/parents' attitude [I pay, therefore an 'A' is deserved."]). I use these in my syllabi:

EXPLANATION OF GRADES:
A - Outstanding work relative to the level necessary to meet course requirements. This work goes FAR beyond completing the requirements of the assignment and shows unusual mastery of the skills and innovative and creative thinking.
B - Significantly above the level necessary to meet course requirements. A “B” is a very good grade, but not outstanding.
C - Average achievement that meets the course requirements in every respect, but does not go beyond. A “C” is a respectable grade, the minimal requirement for one’s course of study.
D – The work is worthy of credit even though it fails to meet fully the course requirements.
F - Represents failure and signifies that the work was either (1) completed but at a level of achieve¬ment that is not worthy of credit or (2) was not completed and there was no agreement between the instructor and the student that the student would be awarded an “I”. Keep in mind that a student can turn in work, attend class and still fail the course if the work is not worthy of credit according to the clearly stated criteria for passing work. The F carries zero grade-points and the credits for the course do not count toward any academic degree program. The credit hours for the course shall count in the grade-point average.
Plus and minus grades fall between the straight letter grades in achievement.

As "average," a grade of C is not ignoble.

I was smitten with the comment about assessing the demonstrated command of material and knowledge. I agree: some students demonstrate that best in tests, while it's more comfortable for others to demonstrate that in essays, presentations, creative reactions, dialogues, etc. I've tried to accommodate all of those when I can (and when appropriate and sanctioned by the department). We must, though, respect and live by the departments' and individual faculty members' methodologies. If it's unclear, ask and persevere until you understand exactly how you will be required to demonstrate what you have learned.

Best,
Wade

A letter grade should ideally reflect the best effort of the student. When students and teachers disagree on a grade, it is usually a matter of miscommunication. Instructors should make clear from day one what their grading criteria and expectations for student work are. And students should talk to their teacher BEFORE significant problems arise that will lead to a poor grade. I can't tell you the number of times that students have come to me after mid-terms in an attempt to boost a C into an A. Learning is a lot like a marathon. You need to parcel out your energy to finish the race. Otherwise you fall flat. Also, there is nothing to be ashamed about if you don't get an A in every class. We cannot be experts at everything we do. I have old math tests at home to prove it!

Who honestly believes there's a direct relationship between grades and success (whatever that means)? We know that many (if not most) American presidents were "C" students, as well as most artists, entertainers, philosophers, etc.

The world also needs engineers, architects, and surgeons, and for them the letter grading system is appropriate--maybe. But, for the rest of us, it seems grades are somewhat discriminatory and counterproductive. It's just another way to segment and compartmentalize people. You got an "A" and I got a "B;" so, you are obviously better than I am. Yes, I know, it should only apply to that specific course, but, we (people) tend to internalize that and our self-esteem is strongly impacted by that, even though, the entire process was probably subjective to begin with. One instructor may perceive "A-level" work the same as another instructor may perceive "B or C level" work.

Except for the technical and quantitative disciplines (and maybe even for those) it's effort that translates into success in life however you define success).

I think that there is a certain subjectivity in grading, but that's not the same as saying it's entirely up to the teacher's "taste." As a professional in the field, I have learned what is considered professional level work, and I therefore have a very clear (and hopefully articulated) sense of what constitutes good work. I do a student no favor giving them an A for low quality work just because they "tried." It's a tough world out there.

Effort is important, and I try to assess how far an individual student progresses in the course of a semester. I might have a student who comes in with a lot of prior experience, who makes little effort, and does well, while another student has zero experience and works his or her butt off to achieve the level that the other student came in with. I prefer to give the latter student the A, because they so clearly pushed themselves the hardest to achieve what they did. But I can't justify not giving a talented student an A, even if they didn't have to work that hard. I think meaningful grades are always a mixture of achievement and effort, the mix varying from student to student.

Are we grading work or ranking individuals? The typical assumption of norm-referenced grading (like grading on a curve) is that what we are grading is in short supply, and also is normally distributed.

Educators need to turn this on its head. We should set out a series of criteria or skills or products which students need to be able master, demonstrate or create. Then, grade students on whether they master, demonstrate, or create the work. A standard to decide a grade beyond Pass/Fail, might be "completed on first try," "completed on second try." etc.

Too many times students are not given a *rubric* or list of what a great, average, poor performance consists of.

While I am not opposed to grades (grades are good), I feel students who focus on their grades from the start and not their study/projects or learning - end up learning the least. Unfortunately it is very hard sometimes for young students (who are pressured by the nature of the world they live in) to close their eyes and trust the learning and stop hyperventilating about As and Bs....and Cs. Its not fair on them or those who are trying to help them learn.

In my classes I like to stress on the importance of process - and try to get students to value that as much as the finished outcome. The design journal (I teach design) for example, is a very valuable tool for recording process, ideas, [effort], ROUGH stuff - which all ends up enriching the finished outcome. And I take care to build that process related grading criteria into all assignments.

If I had to choose one of the survey options above I would have to pick 50/50 (even though its not always such an easy split)

Attending an arts school, evaluation should be based solely on outcome when the student is presenting a work.

Creativity comes effortlessly for some, making it difficult to measure the amount of effort that was put into the work.

As an artist you strive to produce outstanding work!
That is the main focus.

Just like a painter who works under the influence of "a drug"; no visible form of "effort" is apparent in this situation. Yet the finished product may be breath-taking.

Grades in general are a strange concept to me. A letter grade, or a grade point average, is really not a fair measure of one's success, but in our society it has come to hold great significance.

I feel that when you get an education, you get out what you put in, and that is the measure of what you've earned; not some random letter and a piece of paper that says you've completed X amount of credits.

If we are going to have to live with this grading system, then at least let's try to test a little more fairly. Some people express themselves best through tests, some through essays, some through conversation, and surely many other various methods. I think students should be given choices as to how they want to be graded at the end of the semester. If this means we have to arrange one-on-one meetings in which we discuss the content of the class with our professors then that's what we'll have to do, but this system in which we're tested on how much information we can soak up over the course of five months and then spit back out does not work for everyone.

Our generation has come to expect a lot of things in general. We feel like we deserve things, that we are owed them, just for trying.
I believe that the system of grading in place is accurate. Trying hard is not the only ingredient in the recipe for a 4.0.
If a person puts in a lot of effort by doing all the assigned reading, and not just skimming, but still has difficulty getting good grades, something isn't clicking.
At this point this is when seeking help is important. Professors may commend you for notifying them that you're trying but still aren't cutting it. They probably won't give you anything more than a metaphorical gold star though. They will help you succeed if you ask for help. That is where the real grading occurs.
Grades are based on effort and outcome. If your outcome is not up to standard you get a low grade. If you seek help, the effort is shown. Professors recognize when you aren't getting it. They have it written in their grade books. Go to them and explain that you're doing your best. They will give you suggestions on how you can approach the work differently and possibly be more successful, but only if you ask.
Their suggestions may sound like another pile of homework but it will help you understand and get the grades you desire.

It was hard for me to answer this fairly as a student, but I voted for "results." Effort should be taken into account, but it should not be 50%. It's hard to accept a poor grade for something you spent hours working on, but that is how we learn. If we got good grades on mediocre work, no matter how long we worked on it, our work would never improve. After college, when former students have a job with a company, their bosses will expect outstanding results from their employees. Their bosses and clients will not accept, "I tried my hardest," as an excuse. The results need to speak for themselves.

Effort should be a minor part of someone's final grade. While it is important for a student to try to do well, the outcome is still the most important part. By only considering effort when grading a student, the teacher is only fooling the student. In the "real world," while effort may be important, employers are looking for the outcomes. This is especially true in the arts.

Anyone can put effort into a piece, but not just anyone can produce a work of art. One can only hope that by continuously putting effort into their work, they will improve as an artist. This is why effort should only be around 20% of one's final grade-- to teach students that the only way to improve is through tons and tons of effort.

I think the grading criteria should be subject specific. If you are taking a math class that must be graded on outcome because there is a right answer. However, if you are talking about a fine art course or any course that provides creative production, the criteria should be the same across the board: Did the student complete all the assignments on time? Did the student put a sufficient amount of time and effort into all the assignments? Did the student improve throughout the semester? and Was the student actively engaged in the class throughout the semester? I also believe that students should be graded on an individual basis, not comparatively to their fellow classmates.

Although I believe grades are a good motivator, I feel that there is too much focus on them. Students often care more about the grade than whether or not they are learning and gaining something. Instead of memorizing information just long enough to get a good grade on a test, students should be trying to internalize knowledge into understanding in order to change things, to better themselves, and to make a difference.

Neither. Grades should be abolished. I came from a progressive institution (Antioch College - I'm a grad student now) and our 'grades' were merely pass / fail / incomplete. They use this method at other institutions, such as Evergreen.

Students need to own their education and the best way to do this is through policing your own performance. This takes the 'hazing' out of education as well, since you will write papers and produce work based on your own artistic sensibilities than catering to the aesthetic of a professor.

The process of an open and transparent critique is what should be used to advise from your peers and instructors.

Allow students to use these years to say "I'm exploring" rather than "I know what I'm doing".

Grades should be based on the outcome of the work. College is supposed to prepare students for their professional careers. Whether you are working in corporate America or as a freelance artist, you are paid for the outcome of your work- not the effort behind it.

However, the objectives of a class and the grading scale of all assignments should be clearly defined so a student can produce the level of work that results in the grade they desire. Students and employees/ professionals can produce A level material ONLY when they are clear on what is expected of them. It is unfair when a professor lowers a grade when their expectations in an assignment/ exam are not met because the instructions, test reviews, etc. given failed to fully prepare the student.

Effort is important and often overlooked but you have to actually be good at what you do to get a job.

If you want to do well, you have to put in effort. If you screw around, you get nothing. Although it is not always fair, and sometimes, a student can learn the material just fine but also be a total slacker. However, this doesn't mean that grades should always be based on the outcome. There are certainly some classes in which the outcome should have more of a factor, but I think things make sense the way they are, for the most part.

I think they should definitely be based on effort. In almost all of my classes I bust my butt every week. I do assignments, I am one of the few people that actually speak up, and I totally understand and love the material we learn and discuss. Unfortunately I am terrible at tests. When I sit down and look at the questions sitting in front of me my mind goes blank and I can't remember anything. I personally cannot learn in that way. I need to be interactive and engaged with others. I suppose that being an audio and visual learner could all be a part of being an artist.

With artistic mediums, outcome is a direct reflection of effort. Textbook curriculum can not determine artistic ability. Therefore, grades should be based on the evidence of concept understanding within the outcome. We are taught histories, concepts, theories and techniques to which we apply to our work. Grades should rate our level of effort and understanding in those taught ideas. Also, as some ideas are difficult for some to adapt to his or her own work, levels of progress and self-challenges should be factored into grades, as well. Instead of detail-perfect outcomes, we should be graded on the process, our improvement and our evident understanding in the overall topic or medium being utilized.

Grades are, unfortunately, not often reflective of talent or creativity but how well the person involved is able to follow rules and turn in assignments. Education is a business, and there is little care for actual learning, insight, ability, or acumen. The question of effort/product is a false dichotomy at best, with a better inquiry reading: What does it mean to receive a grade? How are the criteria and standards assigned for each letter? Is it solely at the discretion of a single person or entity?

Grades are only necessary due to the fact that most colleges would not achieve accreditation without them. They are also part of a larger structure of rules and regulations concerning student output, whether or not the rules have any validity in the first place. If anything, they denote subordination, assuming the student to be in the inferior position of unknowing and attending a class to become knowledgeable, often disregarding prior understanding of a subject (which is where the problem of required courses come in, but that is a different topic altogether).

I think all grades should be on the pass/fail system. This allows the professor to judge the student on what effort they put into their work, as well as the outcome, and alleviates some stress that the current grading system gives students, because it affects their GPAs and in some cases at Columbia if they are given credit for a class because their grade was inadequate for their major.

When it comes to the arts and media, our degree and the numbers behind it will be worth less than our actual abilities in the vocations of our choosing. Columbia College gives great resources for the self-directed student and grades won't be fooling anyone in the real world. In this sense, grades should be a reflection of the actual work put into it as compared to the outcome expected by the teacher for that individual student. A grade can be a mirror reflecting whether the student put in the work she or he needs based on the student's skill level to have actually accomplished something of note.

Both should be taken into consideration.

On one hand, students are still learning, and should be encouraged to put effort into something and learn from mistakes.

On the other hand, acing a student who works ineffectively and puts out an ordinary project encourages bad habits.

College is not just about learning the medium, it's also about learning how to improve your skills. When I graduate, I don't want my art to plateau, so I need to know how to assess my behavior and challenge myself.

What I'm leading to is this: I care more about the feedback than the grade. I want to know what is working and what needs work. If my art is sub-par, I want to know how to make it better, and to be encouraged to make it better. Likewise, if I put out great art with little effort, imagine how much better it could be if the professor challenges me to put in lots of effort!

This issue strikes me as on the same level as one of those prominent political debates where everyone deems it necessary to draw a definitive answer. Effort is not necessarily how many hours you've studied for the test you failed; indirect effort can be the fact that one classmate knows course material prior to class because of interest. So effort strikes me as irrelevant in that sense. Keep in mind as well that Columbia is in large part an art school; and if one definition of art is that anything created with intent is art, I ask: how can art be graded(outcome)? For the more straightforward general education courses such as arithmetic and sciences, outcome is much more important, regardless of effort, because it is a more exacting field. Bottom line, there is no clear answer, effort or outcome will and should continue to be course to course, professor to professor.

Grades should be a pass or fail. This is art that we are creating from our views why should we be graded on how we see things???

The outcome is obviously important, however, there are a lot of classes where grading is almost completely subjective, and what do we do in those situations? a grade should not be simply based on your teachers opinion of the outcome

I am gearing this comment towards majors that deal with the arts. For the more academic majors- it should be a mix of effort and outcome (since both are needed) but for art students- does it really matter what your effort is if your outcome is fantastic? If you don't put in the effort- the outcome is going to suffer. So why not just grade the outcome?

Besides, there are some students who are just more talented and don't *need* to put in the effort. They can just do it and because of course requirements- have to wade through a bunch of classes they don't need.

Since Columbia is supposed to be about the body of work- isn't grading on effort sort of silly? Does it matter how major artists came up with and executed their work? That's not what made them successful- it was their outcome.

In order to prepare us for the real, professional world we should be graded on our outcome not how much effort we put in.

I like the old dart-board method. A is the bulls-eye, obviously

Students are nursed too much when in school - we don't go to school to get grades, we go to school to prepare ourselves for the "real" world. If you can't produce good work - you're likely not going to get a job, or sell your artwork, or exhibit your work. Grades need to be based on the work that you produce - if the work isn't good enough, the grade shouldn't be either. When we graduate and start working, we're not going to be paid because we began making some work, and put a lot of effort into it, but didn't quite make the deadline for it. If I have a job, I only get paid because I follow through with the work - and if I put a lot of effort into it, the client might see that and hire me again (if the work is good) - but they certainly won't hire me again if the work is sub par, even if the effort was there. Grades should be pass or fail.

As far as general education classes are concerned, grades mostly should depend on outcome. When you have a paper to write, a book to read, or some problems to do, the outcome most definitely reflects the effort. There is very little to get in the way of pursuing these kinds of assignments besides laziness, or "not having time" as we sometimes call laziness these days. :)

When it comes to more creative classes, it takes tremendous effort to achieve ANY outcome, let alone a wonderful one. I'm going to use film as an example, because I am a film student. I'm here to learn, and learning to make a great film takes a ton of thinking, preparation, and frankly, a lot of falling flat on your face. However, this is all learning. I can't be expected to make a perfect film. I shouldn't even be expected to make a decent one. I think in these creative classes, the grade should be based on the effort, and perhaps a reflection of what has been learned. I've been lucky enough to have teachers who seem to think the same way, and while I have put out a couple pretty flawed films, I learned from each one and showed improvement. I can't imagine how disheartening it would be to put all the time and effort I did into those films and have the teachers grade on the shitty outcome over the tremendous amount of time and effort I put into them.

It definitely depends on the class but for the most part, the outcome of a work normally shows the effort put into an assignment.

Now sure some students with a more natural talent in an area may have a "better" outcome when compared with other students without having to put forth as much effort, but when compared with other work that same "natural" student has done in the past, it might be more evident of the lack of effort.

So yes, grades should definitely be judged on the outcome of a project or assignment because the outcome reflects the effort that each individual has put into their own work. Now deciding on how much effort is necessary for the assignment, that is up to the class and the instructor.

I think, depending on the course, the importance of outcome vs effort can and should shift. But, the thing that may not be recognized is the difference between quality and quantity effort. (This is especially true for Gen. Ed. classes.) There are usually specific things that are to be learned and studied. If you put forth the effort learning the right things, the outcome usually shows that. You can put forth the same amount of effort stressing about it the last day before the final, but that isn't a reason for you to get a good grade.

For example: You have a photo project to shoot in an enclosed space, and you put your heart and soul into shooting an open field. No matter how great your prints are, it doesn't change the fact that you didn't follow the assignment.

Effort should be rewarded, absolutely. But when you're asked to get dinner but you get ice cream instead, it defeats the purpose. Nice try, but completely disregarding the original goal. Same goes for grades. (Yes, dinner and ice cream were completely random, but they help prove my point.)

It definitely depends upon the type of class, and obviously it will always be changing because no two teachers and no two students are ever alike. However, especially in a liberal arts school, it should be quite apparent in completed work how much effort was put into the homework/assignment/project. Usually, the more effort one puts into something, the better the outcome and vice versa. Although it is possible to put a tremendous effort into something and have the outcome still not be 100%, this is not usually the case and even then the effort should still be apparent.
So basically, as this being part of the teachers' jobs, the teachers should be able to look at completed work and judge the effort based upon the outcome, which has reflected the effort, and therefore distribute fair and deserved grades that mimic both effort and outcome equally.
The real work world isn't too kind to those who, no matter how much effort is put into something, cannot seem to get a good outcome. It is also not too kind to those who put in no effort or passion into their work, even if the outcome is acceptable (especially in the arts). An even split of both is required to be successful and schools, especially colleges, should be paying very close attention to this.

As a writer and a graduate student, I wish with all my heart that there were some objective criteria by which to determine the quality of my writing. That way I could go to publishers and say, "Looka here folks, I got me an A from Columbia College so you really better jump aboard this train and publish me now." Trouble is that what is good isn't always commercial and what is commercial isn't always good.

Students who try, who turn in all their assignments, who make a serious effort at their art, who participate in class, and generally behave like they attend school with a purpose deserve a better grade than those who do the minimum, no matter what the quality of their work.

We all get those classes where we have to work our butts off because it is so difficult, and then when it comes to the end of the semester, we realize our grade isn't as good as we thought it would be. I think teachers should base grades off effort and outcome. If a student is always coming to class, participating, and at least trying to understand the class, then they should get a good grade.

"Conundrum!"

In school, my mind translates education as development, and the real world with results. What a fine line it is to grade, especially in an art school.

So as I've chewed on that question throughout my educational experience,I've decidedly boiled it down to this:

We're here to learn. You either care or you don't. And it shows to your teachers and to your classmates.

My most fruitful experiences have been when I was rewarded for both working hard and producing solid results. While I'm confident I'm in the right field of study, each semester, I hope my instructors depend on the combination as they grade. That way, not only do you know where you stand throughout the semester, you know where you stand at the end.

Wow, talk about a running theme in education, grades.

To answer the question: How should grades work? ...

It depends on the college/university.

When it comes to a liberal arts college like Columbia, the emphasis should be on effort. I've noticed teachers focus on the process of learning and class participation over standardized tests. Their interested in producing well rounded people, over dry pencil pushers.

In the end,'You get out what you put in', so effort wins here.

p.s. If you're interested in this subject, read the book Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell. He weighs application and effort heavily over talent. If you don't agree with me already, you will after you read his book.

I have to say that the combo would be nice. I have found that I don't always have the correct answers on exams/projects/papers but always try to do my best. If effort shows, why not allow that to contribute to the overall grade?

I think it should be a combination of effort and talent. But lets be honest- in the real world, only talent matters. Talent AND effort. If the un-talented guy makes a horrible movie, it won't matter how much effort he put into it- audiences won't go see it. If the talented guy makes a great movie in 10 minutes (even if it didn't take that much effort) he'll get the box office bucks. That's just the way our world works. Sad, but true.

I think it should be a combination of effort and talent. But lets be honest- in the real world, only talent matters. Talent AND effort. If the un-talented guy makes a horrible movie, it won't matter how much effort he put into it- audiences won't go see it. If the talented guy makes a great movie in 10 minutes (even if it didn't take that much effort) he'll get the box office bucks. That's just the way our world works.
Sad, but true.