Specifications Grading in an Undergraduate Engineering Dynamics Course

David A. Copp

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Portland, Oregon
Publication Date: June 23, 2024
Start Date: June 23, 2024
End Date: July 12, 2024
Conference Session: MECH - Technical Session 9: Advanced Mechanical Engineering Topics
Tagged Division: Mechanical Engineering Division (MECH)
Page Count: 19
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--47988
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/47988
Download Count: 29

Paper Authors

biography

David A. Copp University of California, Irvine orcid.org/0000-0002-5206-5223

visit author page

David A. Copp received the B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Arizona and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in mechanical engineering from the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is currently an Assistant Professor of Teaching at the University of California, Irvine in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. Prior to joining UCI, he was a Senior Member of the Technical Staff at Sandia National Laboratories and an adjunct faculty member in Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of New Mexico. His broad research interests include engineering education, as well as control and optimization of nonlinear and hybrid systems with applications to power and energy systems, multi-agent systems, robotics, and biomedicine. He is a recipient of UCSB's Center for Control, Dynamical Systems, and Computation Best PhD Thesis award and multiple UCI Chancellor's Awards for Excellence in Undergraduate Research Mentorship.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Dynamics is a core undergraduate mechanical engineering course that often acts as a gateway to upper division engineering curriculum. Some students find the course exciting and motivating while others find it overly challenging and discouraging. Grading schemes can play a significant role in students’ motivation for, and approach to, learning. In this article, we present two different grading schemes used in an undergraduate engineering dynamics course at the University of California, Irvine, and specifically evaluate the merits of a standards-based, learner-centered, specifications grading scheme for promoting student learning and overall achievement. The first grading scheme we present is a traditional points-based scheme that assigns points to students’ performance on summative assessments like quizzes and exams. The second grading scheme uses specifications grading, without points, to assess all assignments as either demonstrating sufficient mastery of the course learning objectives or otherwise needing revision. This specifications grading scheme allows for assignment revisions and resubmissions and clearly defines assessment criteria and standards for passing assignments and earning a particular grade. This shifts students’ focus from accumulating points to mastering the learning objectives and promotes metacognition of learning and improving.

We describe the course learning objectives and the two different grading schemes, along with details of how the assessments in specifications grading were designed. Then we present students’ performance in both grading schemes and students perceptions on how specifications grading affected their learning, anxiety, and self efficacy, as collected in midterm and end of term surveys. In general, students reported feeling that the specifications grading scheme helped them learn and gave them confidence to earn their desired grade, although some students reported that the specifications grading scheme was more stressful than traditional points-based grading. Finally, we discuss the advantages and challenges, from the instructor’s observations and perspective, associated with transitioning from a traditional points-based grading scheme to using specifications grading.

Citation
Format

Copp, D. A. (2024, June), Specifications Grading in an Undergraduate Engineering Dynamics Course Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. 10.18260/1-2--47988

TY - CPAPER
AB - Dynamics is a core undergraduate mechanical engineering course that often acts as a gateway to upper division engineering curriculum. Some students find the course exciting and motivating while others find it overly challenging and discouraging. Grading schemes can play a significant role in students’ motivation for, and approach to, learning. In this article, we present two different grading schemes used in an undergraduate engineering dynamics course at the University of California, Irvine, and specifically evaluate the merits of a standards-based, learner-centered, specifications grading scheme for promoting student learning and overall achievement. The first grading scheme we present is a traditional points-based scheme that assigns points to students’ performance on summative assessments like quizzes and exams. The second grading scheme uses specifications grading, without points, to assess all assignments as either demonstrating sufficient mastery of the course learning objectives or otherwise needing revision. This specifications grading scheme allows for assignment revisions and resubmissions and clearly defines assessment criteria and standards for passing assignments and earning a particular grade. This shifts students’ focus from accumulating points to mastering the learning objectives and promotes metacognition of learning and improving.

We describe the course learning objectives and the two different grading schemes, along with details of how the assessments in specifications grading were designed. Then we present students’ performance in both grading schemes and students perceptions on how specifications grading affected their learning, anxiety, and self efficacy, as collected in midterm and end of term surveys. In general, students reported feeling that the specifications grading scheme helped them learn and gave them confidence to earn their desired grade, although some students reported that the specifications grading scheme was more stressful than traditional points-based grading. Finally, we discuss the advantages and challenges, from the instructor’s observations and perspective, associated with transitioning from a traditional points-based grading scheme to using specifications grading.
AU - David A. Copp
CY - Portland, Oregon
DA - 2024/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Specifications Grading in an Undergraduate Engineering Dynamics Course
UR - https://peer.asee.org/47988
DO - 10.18260/1-2--47988
ER -