Why are grades due so soon...

[Caracal]

[
Years ago, LarryC had a plan for that as well:

Have a big test, or better yet a writing assignment, due very early, the second or third week. (Important: Schedule the assignment before the drop date at your university.) Mark the heck out of the papers and make everyone rewrite them. This will shake out about 10% of the class--the 10% who would have been slackers and whiners and have given you bad evaluations. It also makes the remaining students prioritize your class over their other, less important studies.

Well, the drop date at my university is a week after the start of classes, so that part doesn't work. Again, I don't actually have a problem with the idea and I basically try to implement it. But, "marking the heck" out of exams in a bunch of classes simultaneously and getting them all back within a week, while also teaching all my classes isn't particularly feasible.

the pushback is "that's not how college works in my intro classes".

I still remember how I felt when visiting a philosophy colleague as she pointed to a pile of grading with "oh, it's essay 2 week and that's my stack" and seeing that her four-times-per-term stack was smaller than my weekly stack. 

You really have a hard time with the idea that things might work differently in different disciplines. Again, I actually do make sure students get feedback early on and I think that it is important to do so.

I'll say it again: if you're not being paid enough to do the job, which includes regular feedback to students and participating in the bureaucratic processes, then go do something else and let the system adjust so that people are being paid for their efforts.

What about any of what I wrote suggests I don't believe in doing those things? I'm very available to students, I provide regular feedback and I do what I'm asked. I do think it is pretty revealing the extent to which you just don't believe in consultation or dialogue on any of this. The whole point of having qualified faculty teaching courses is that they are supposed to be able to figure out how to design classes in ways that make sense for their discipline and the particular subject matter. Obviously we don't do that in a vacuum and it is important to incorporate various institutional goals in to the teaching of courses. However, your position seems to be that anybody who says "hey, you know I could do a better job accomplishing this thing with a slightly modified series of deadlines" isn't a team player and should go away.

Also, the insinuations of laziness, or lack of commitment, are really uncalled for. I don't mind the back and forth here, but I'm really not trying to make this personal. I probably shouldn't actually get pissed about stuff that random people I don't know write on a message board, but I do and then have to stop myself from writing unkind things in return. I don't really need to be getting angry about the fora of all places...

[Ruralguy]

Yes, of course, if absolutely everyone got in their grades a day later, the world wouldn't blow up. The problem though is that you always have to go after those last few people, and often those people  have weak students (they are teaching huge classes with no TA, so takes longer to grade, etc.).  Those same people might not post grades in for another day or two, and only after threatening firing them (and some have been---if they were "firable" that is).  So, administration sets the due date knowing that they need 1 or 2 days leeway for stragglers. Then they have to all the stuff Polly_mer mentioned (not just grade calculation, but determination of probation, expulsion, financial aid, etc.) .

I can't answer why your particular school might have an unusually tight schedule or an usually loose one, but in general its dictated by administrative demands, that is either legal mandates or mandates by the college's rules, not just an admin that wants to torture faculty and students. Of course, there can be maladministration, but in general, thats not directly relevant.

[Caracal]

Yes, of course, if absolutely everyone got in their grades a day later, the world wouldn't blow up. The problem though is that you always have to go after those last few people, and often those people  have weak students (they are teaching huge classes with no TA, so takes longer to grade, etc.).  Those same people might not post grades in for another day or two, and only after threatening firing them (and some have been---if they were "firable" that is).  So, administration sets the due date knowing that they need 1 or 2 days leeway for stragglers. Then they have to all the stuff Polly_mer mentioned (not just grade calculation, but determination of probation, expulsion, financial aid, etc.) .

I can't answer why your particular school might have an unusually tight schedule or an usually loose one, but in general its dictated by administrative demands, that is either legal mandates or mandates by the college's rules, not just an admin that wants to torture faculty and students. Of course, there can be maladministration, but in general, thats not directly relevant.

Fair enough. Probably at the end it is just as well. It always seems terrible and impossible, but I get it done and then the semester is out of my life that much sooner.

[geheimrat]

Think about how many moving pieces have to fall into place to get everything for this term wrapped up.  You mention graduation and academic status and probation.  There's a whole process to be done after grades are submitted.  Yes, some parts are easily automated, even for 20 000 students.  Other parts require hearings that will need all the information distributed to the reviewers with enough time to read, think, and be ready for the hearings. 

In addition to the hearings that can be planned in advance, there will be students who file formal grievances and exceptions.  While a dean etc. can block off big chunks of time to be ready for the individual students, they can't be on top of each individual case until all the paperwork is filed, which can't happen until all the grades are in, have been sent to the students, and then the students have followed the parts of the process that happen before a formal appeal to the dean.

How is all this completed between the spring and summer terms?  Obviously there are fewer students taking summer classes, but we only have two college business days between when students receive spring grades and when summer term starts.

[polly_mer]

Think about how many moving pieces have to fall into place to get everything for this term wrapped up.  You mention graduation and academic status and probation.  There's a whole process to be done after grades are submitted.  Yes, some parts are easily automated, even for 20 000 students.  Other parts require hearings that will need all the information distributed to the reviewers with enough time to read, think, and be ready for the hearings. 

In addition to the hearings that can be planned in advance, there will be students who file formal grievances and exceptions.  While a dean etc. can block off big chunks of time to be ready for the individual students, they can't be on top of each individual case until all the paperwork is filed, which can't happen until all the grades are in, have been sent to the students, and then the students have followed the parts of the process that happen before a formal appeal to the dean.

How is all this completed between the spring and summer terms?  Obviously there are fewer students taking summer classes, but we only have two college business days between when students receive spring grades and when summer term starts.

Since summer Pell is no longer a thing, almost no one is getting summer financial aid.  This is especially true for people who were enrolled full-time for fall and spring; they will have used up their financial aid eligibility for the school year.

Thus, summer doesn't count in the same way as spring and fall.  There is plenty of time for the spring appeals to occur before fall enrollment when financial aid will be disbursed again.

[polly_mer]

However, your position seems to be that anybody who says "hey, you know I could do a better job accomplishing this thing with a slightly modified series of deadlines" isn't a team player and should go away.

That's what you read.  That's not what I wrote.  However, faculty members tend to focus heavily on their individual classrooms without thinking about the bigger picture.  Even after I explained the bigger picture, the focus was on the effect on you as an individual professor with a distinct lack of awareness of what your colleagues, many of whom teach in fields much closer to yours than I ever have, have mentioned as being ways to be a good teacher and yet still make the required-for-good-reason deadlines.

Also, the insinuations of laziness, or lack of commitment, are really uncalled for.

No, the key question that hangs over all of academia is whether adjuncts are doing the same pro-rated teaching job as a full-time faculty member or whether they are significantly cheaper, even on a per-class basis, because they are doing a lesser job.   Go read what you wrote in the original post and know that many of us have done all those things including with small children and on a shorter timeline (it sounds so luxurious to have a whole week to grade finals along with the final projects/papers/whatevers instead of 48 hours from the end of the final period) as well as serving on the committees that do all the reviews (academic progress, academic dismissal, academic honesty, and any sort of formal grade appeal) and then advising the students who will need a new plan for the spring.

A second possibly unrelated theme that keeps coming up in discussions of the future of academia is the value-added for students in general education breadth requirements.  We've interacted quite a lot in that area, so I know your views.  However, I'm still at a loss as to what specifically your implementations mean since what I read in your question posts don't jibe all that well with the theories I've read you expousing.

Thus, I'm still waiting to read what your particular students are doing for the 18-24 hours for the first two weeks that are valuable and contribute to students achieving course goals, but somehow don't lead up being enough for a graded "meaningful assignment" in the third week (i.e., at 27/36 hours of work).  I've spend a lot of time with faculty in a variety of fields and a variety of levels asking questions related to their syllabuses and course planning while wearing my assessment hat.  I've seen many excellent options because fields do vary so widely.

Because I have so much experience with faculty, my spidey sense tingles a lot when individual faculty members go immediately to some other argument  instead of directly answering the question of what the students are doing in the course and then hearing the ideas that might work make a good class even better.

[marshwiggle]

However, your position seems to be that anybody who says "hey, you know I could do a better job accomplishing this thing with a slightly modified series of deadlines" isn't a team player and should go away.

That's what you read.  That's not what I wrote.  However, faculty members tend to focus heavily on their individual classrooms without thinking about the bigger picture. 

When I was originally hired as a lab instructor, instead of labs attached to individual courses, there were a couple of "integrated" lab courses which were supposed to have labs from all of the "lecture" courses but run by me. If the faculty teaching the "lecture courses" had their way, that integrated lab course would have looked something like this:

• no labs for the first 3 or 4 weeks
• 1 or 2 labs a week for the next 3 or 4 weeks
• 14 labs in the last two weeks when everyone has covered everything

Needless to say, that wasn't an option. Having one lab every week meant that there had to be labs students could do at the beginning, and every topic in every course could not have an associated lab in the last week or two. In fact, since there were about 4 associated courses, it meant that the last lab associated with one course would have to happen at least a month before the end of term. (Also, labs could not be simply delayed because someone "hadn't gotten to that topic yet" in their course.)

What I had to do was basically design a lab experience which would be meaningful for students, whether or not that fit every individual faculty member's idea of what "must" be in the labs.

[spork]

Much of the discussion here reflects institutional processes that no longer reflect realities. A lot of what we are forced to do is still based on assumptions like:

• K-12 and post-secondary ed need to have the same annual schedule of fall-spring on, winter holidays-summer off.
• College is a full-time activity equivalent to a 40-hour per week job.
• Education is the number one priority in every student's life.

While I would dearly love to operate as a faculty member in a system that conforms better to the real world, I can't unless I want to get fired.

Edited to add:

Perhaps more pertinent because it's more specific: in addition to mid-term grade reports I have to submit early warnings within a month of the start of the semester for a large portion of my students (e.g., first-years). At the close of Week 1, as soon as drop-add period has concluded, I have an "open book" auto-graded quiz on the syllabus, worth a minimal amount toward the course grade, in all my courses. Any student who can't be bothered to take this quiz on their own time is very unlikely to do well in the course; generally these students perform at D or F level if they stick around to the end of the semester. The practice also ensures that students can't complain at the end of the semester about not knowing course policies. I also have several very brief, very easy to grade writing assignments in the first few weeks of the semester. Again, students who can't be bothered to complete them are setting themselves up for problems and I tell them so.

If one subscribes to the pedagogical logic of the usefulness of formative assessment, then ideally a course that is 14 weeks long ought to have at least a few signposts throughout those 14 weeks. Week 5 means a third of the semester is completed, so, in my mind, assignments and exams worth a third of the course grade ought to have occurred. Nothing predicts problems at the end of a semester for an instructor like a course empty of assessments and students not getting any forewarning of their final course grade.

Edited again to add:

This kind of instructional environment is probably very peculiar to the USA. I know in the UK that assessment beyond a bare minimum is specifically prohibited.

[Caracal]

Perhaps more pertinent because it's more specific: in addition to mid-term grade reports I have to submit early warnings within a month of the start of the semester for a large portion of my students (e.g., first-years). At the close of Week 1, as soon as drop-add period has concluded, I have an "open book" auto-graded quiz on the syllabus, worth a minimal amount toward the course grade, in all my courses. Any student who can't be bothered to take this quiz on their own time is very unlikely to do well in the course; generally these students perform at D or F level if they stick around to the end of the semester. The practice also ensures that students can't complain at the end of the semester about not knowing course policies. I also have several very brief, very easy to grade writing assignments in the first few weeks of the semester. Again, students who can't be bothered to complete them are setting themselves up for problems and I tell them so.

If one subscribes to the pedagogical logic of the usefulness of formative assessment, then ideally a course that is 14 weeks long ought to have at least a few signposts throughout those 14 weeks. Week 5 means a third of the semester is completed, so, in my mind, assignments and exams worth a third of the course grade ought to have occurred. Nothing predicts problems at the end of a semester for an instructor like a course empty of assessments and students not getting any forewarning of their final course grade.

Thanks, this is very helpful in terms of how to think of "significant" early assignments. The way I structure my intro and gen-ed courses, most of the grade is determined by 4 exams spaced throughout the semester. Attendance and participation are small pieces and then there is a smallish project at the end of the semester. I've been thinking that the only way to really have "significant" grades by three weeks into the semester would be to have an exam (which is tough to manage in three courses simultaneously in terms of course material, grading and the like) but if I instead break apart the project at the end into a couple of smaller pieces, that gives me some more options and also provides a good way to identify students who can't be bothered to follow some directions and do a very structured assignment.

[spork]

That kind of set-up gives you a legitimate opportunity to inform students "I see that you did not do well on/did not submit Really Easy Structured Week 3 Assignment. Work in this course gets more complex as the semester progresses. If you have other priorities that conflict with the time and effort required to do well in this course, you ought to consider withdrawing."