GEORGETOWN
UNIVERSITY
Department of History
H.
R. Spendelow
Grading System
updated: 22
Nov 2012
Click here for a statement on Copyright,
which applies by implication to all material, whether written by me or
my students, referenced through this page.
A few words about grades... We all,
students
and professors alike, realize that grading is an intuitive and somewhat
arbitrary act, especially in history, where few answers are obviously
"right"
or "wrong." My promise to you is that the grading standard,
however
subjective it may be, will be applied uniformly to the whole class, and
any grade will be explained (if not altered) upon request. My
usual
procedure is to read an answer (essays may be read several times) and
then
assign it a letter grade intended to convey a message according to
the general standard found in a separate document: the Grading System Summary. My
responsibility is to bring to my reading of your work the
background/expertise that helps me understand what you're trying to
say, but to edit with enough rigor that the non-specialist will
understand it too.
General
Notes on Grades:
There are several
peculiarities
about
my grading system which should be made explicit. Two relate to the
grading
of Identifications on exams. First of all, you cannot earn a
perfect
A if you leave out the time-frame or the significance of the
item.
"Significance" does not mean piling on more data, but means stepping
back
to analyze the data you have already presented. Secondly, if you
mistake one ID for another (e.g., the equivalent of writing about the
Treaty
of Portsmouth when asked to identify the Treaty of Nerchinsk), all is
not
lost; you drop down to around a C and then your answer is judged as if
I had in fact asked the question you answered.
Students often
assume that
they
start out in a presumed state of perfection (i.e., with an A) and get
points
taken off only to the extent that they fall from grace through
ambiguity
or error. On the contrary, I assume that students start out at the
median
range of B-/C+ and have to work their way up from there by
demonstrating
mastery of the data and brilliance of interpretation. Hence,
particularly
on mid-terms, you may find your grade to be lower than expected.
For papers in
particular, be
advised that I
take
very seriously the fulfillment of our scholarly responsibilities in
annotation.
Inadequate indication of sources will drop even a paper with content at
the "A" level down to a "C", while wilful misrepresentation will be
grounds
for, at the very least, an F for the paper.
Letter
Grades and Numerical Weights:
In order to
facilitate giving
appropriate
weights to various grades (e.g., a single ID vs. a 60-point essay, or a
paper counting 35% toward your course grade vs. the mid-term exam
counting
20%), letter grades are assigned numerical equivalents according to the
following table:
| A |
95
|
C |
75
|
| A- |
91.67
|
C- |
71.67
|
| B+ |
88.33
|
D+ |
68.33
|
| B |
85
|
D |
65
|
| B- |
81.67
|
D- |
61.67
|
| C+ |
78.33
|
F |
55
|
|
blank / no response = 0
|
For example,
combining a grade
of
C+ for the mid-term essay (78.33 x 60% = 47) with an overall average
of,
let us say, B+ for the IDs (88.33 x 40% = 35.33 gives a total of 82.33
for the entire exam, which falls in the B- range. Reversing those
grades (i.e., B+ on the essay, an average of C+ for the IDs) gives
84.33,
which falls in the B range.
At the level of
individual
questions,
the important grade is the letter grade, but at the level of the entire
exam, the significant grade is the numerical total. For example,
totals of 77 and 79 would both register in the C+ range, but the latter
would contribute two more points toward the mid-term component of your
course average than the former would . In calculating final
grades
for the course, the following table applies:
| A |
93.334 and above |
C |
73.334 - 76.667 |
| A- |
90.000 - 93.333 |
C- |
70.000 - 73.333 |
| B+ |
86.668 - 89.999 |
D+ |
66.668 - 69.999 |
| B |
83.334 - 86.667 |
D |
63.334 - 66.667 |
| B- |
80.000 - 83.333 |
D- |
60.000 - 63.333 |
| C+ |
76.668 - 79.999 |
F |
59.999 and below |
Where
This All Fits In:
Your syllabus tells
you the
relative
weight for each part of the course's requirements. For each component,
I try to give as candid an assessment as I can. However, at the end of
the semester there is usually some sort of upward adjustment. While I
do
not believe in grading on a strict curve (i.e., a certain percentage of
grades at each level), I do try to make sure that there are a
reasonable
number of "A"'s for the class. If this means adding some points to the
totals, then everyone rises equally.
Markings
on Tests and Papers:
On your tests, and
especially on
your
papers, you will find a number of editorial markings in my usually
hurried
and illegible script. Explanations of some of the most common are
listed below. Also, you may find wrong dates or terms X'd out, while
important
words or phrases will be underlined. A single vertical line in
the
margin indicates an important point in your argument, while a double
line
marks a very good point.
Admittedly, my
tendency is to
mark
mistakes or problem areas more than I mark good parts, so do not get
discouraged
if the corrections seem excessively negative. Please feel free to
take advantage of office-hours to come and talk about the strengths of
your work, along with the areas that could still be improved. And
also, don't hesitate to take advantage of the tutorial services at the
Writing
Center (Lauinger 217; phone 687-4246).
On
the version I
hand
out in class, from this point on the left-hand column shows the kinds
of
marks I'm likely to put on a paper; so far, I haven't gotten around to
figuring out how to get a graphic representation of those marks up on
the
web.
= i.e. [id
est, or "that is": you
should
have given a brief explanation of the term just used]
= e.g. [exempli
gratia, or "for
example":
give an example which illustrates the generalization just made]
= sp. [spelling error; e.g., "emporer".
If
you have more than a couple per page, you've got serious problems.]
= awk. [awkwardness in expression]
= ambig. [ambiguous phrase which is open to
misinterpretation]
= vague [not enough here in the context of your
statement to make the meaning clear]
= ? [date doubtful, "fact" questionable,
interpretation
difficult to support, etc.]
= ?? [date highly doubtful, "fact" scarcely
credible,
interpretation virtually impossible to support, etc.]
= ??? [off-the-wall, etc.]
= ?! [silly or ridiculous error]
= not quite... [you've got the right
names/terms, but don't have a clear idea of their relationship]
= OK... [technically, this isn't wrong, but
seems to miss the point]
= relevance? [Your facts are correct, but how
do
they relate to the general point you're making?]
= significance? [What conclusion can you draw
from
these data?]
= evidence? [On what basis do you make this
statement?]
= focus? [This paragraph seems to be going in
several
directions at once and lacks a clear focus.]
= source? [Where did you get this
information?
a footnote is needed here...]
= paragraph [You should begin a new paragraph
here.]
= paraphrase [rather than quoting directly]
= block quotation [check any of the standard
guides for the proper format]
= passive voice [try to recast the sentence in
the active voice]
= vocabulary / (or "word choice" ) [wrong
vocabulary
item, e.g., confusing "effect" with "affect," etc., or a word with a
perhaps
unintended nuance]
= brackets indicating that the enclosed words
or
letters are not necessary
= unnecessary punctuation or letter; e.g., "we
see it's influence on..."; Confuscian...
17 = [indicates a footnote that was
checked and found to be accurate]
= [indicates the word- or letter-order should
be
reversed; e.g., "buraeucracy," "to gladly agree"]
= [There's an apparent contradiction between
the
circled parts.]
