This document lays out the Avalon Center policies on written performance evaluations of student work. It should be used by faculty as a guide and may by students to better understand our evaluation processes.

Introduction

AVALON CENTER's official policy on grading places numerical grades, grade points, and GPAs in a subordinate position to the primary method of evaluation, the Written Performance Evaluation. All teachers at ACDS are required to submit both a numerical grade on the 0-4 scale (or other notations in the case of withdrawal, audit, P/N grading option, or Incomplete). They are also required to compose a narrative evaluation of a student's performance as a learner in their courses.

It is our hope that a focus on written evaluations will help students to perceive instructors and peers as resources rather than as potential obstacles. This form of assessment can help students distinguish their strong and weak areas and detect patterns in their performance across quarters. It can focus their efforts on improvement, encourage them to go beyond expectations, and help them learn to collaborate. We want to create a campus culture in which students with different talents and perspectives respect each other's talents rather than compete with one another for grades.

Our performance evaluation system is intended to be flexible and individual. It does not impose stylistic uniformity, nor does it mandate uniform expectations of instructors. This guide details the performance evaluation system at Avalon and provides helpful tips, recommendations, and some sample student evaluations. The latter are intended to offer ideas and templates for evaluation writers.

Center Rules Regarding Evaluations

Each instructor shall prepare a written evaluation at the end of the term for each student in his or her class who takes the course for credit.
Evaluations are to be filed with the Registrar at the time of filing the end-of-term course grade reports or no later than 14 working days after the close of the term.
An appeal may be filed if the student is persuaded that the instructor has given a grade notation or narrative evaluation based on:

inappropriate criteria such as race, politics, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, or national origin.
capricious or arbitrary application of appropriate criteria in a manner not reflective of student performance in relation to course requirements.

Example #1:

Elementary Latin

The first quarter of Latin forms and syntax, using the Smith and Jones textbook. Evaluation based on class participation, quizzes, midterm and final examinations.

Grasp of Forms: Very Good

Grasp of Syntax: Good

Skill in Translating: Very Good

General Comments: Ms LeFay worked hard and the results were obvious. She needs only to tighten her knowledge of syntax a bit more.

__________________________________________________

Example #2:

Introductory American Politics

__________________________________________________

Example #3:

Dante's Divine Comedy in Translation

Large lecture class (120 students) with weekly discussion section. Students read Dante's Vita Nuova and the Divine Comedy (Inferno, Purgatorio and selected canti from Paradiso.); selected lyrics from French and Italian courtly poetry; Books I-VI of Virgil's Aeneid. Two papers and a final exam were required.

Example #4:

Introduction to Human Evolution

This is a large lecture course accompanied by weekly lab-discussion sections. Evaluation is based on midterm and final essay exams, participation in weekly sections, and a term paper. Morgan's midterm showed a fair understanding of the issues but confusion about some concepts. Morgan followed up by rewriting the problem areas on her test and working diligently to clear up these minor confusions. She improved her class performance by writing a very good final exam. Morgan wrote a thoughtful term paper on primate communication. She was a dedicated member of her weekly discussion section, and contributed many good ideas and insights into the matters being discussed. Overall, Morgan's mastery of the material presented in this class was very good.

_______________________________________________

Example #5:

Computer Organization

Introductory assembly language and computer architecture. Weekly programming assignments in MIPS (simulator) and HC11 (standalone microcontroller kit) assembly languages. 4 graded and 6 checked off programming assignments. Overall score composed of final (30%), weekly quizzes (35%), checked programs (10%), and graded programs (25%).

Morgan was a regular contributor to class. She occasionally received reduced scores on programming assignments due to the checkoff policy and not carefully reading assignment requirements. Even taking this into account, her final and quiz performances did not meet the basic expectations of the course.

Overall class performance: Poor but worthy of some credit. ________________________________________________

Example #6:

Physical Geology

Introductory course using Jones and Jones, 4th edition. Students assessed on three exams (50%), four homework assignments (35%) and section participation and project (15%). 95 students completed the course. There were 15 A's, 30 B's, 30 C's and 10 D's assigned.

Morgan received scores of 100, 77, 88 and 74 on the four homework assignments (relative to class averages of 92, 86, 91 and 95, respectively). Compared to her peers, this is good work. She tended to do well with interpretation and synthesis, but struggled with more quantitative (numerical) questions. On the three exams, Morgan earned scores of 77, 71 and 77 (relative to class averages of 71, 77 and 74) placing her right at the class average. Again, problems with quantitative questions, especially calculator exercises, were apparent. Her section project was a nicely researched and well-organized introduction to the geologic history of the Pinnacles National Monument. Overall, Morgan's work was average.

______________________________________________

Example #7:

Celtic Heritage

In this introduction to the Celtic literary and mythological tales and ancient Celtic society, Ms LeFay always attended class, contributing frequently and usefully to discussion forums. She satisfactorily completed two reflection essays, with revisions. After a somewhat uneven start to the quarter, Ms LeFay made substantial progress in explaining her ideas more clearly and coherently, adding greater depth to her analyses, and improving the accuracy of her proof reading and use of sources. Her term paper comparing the figures of Lugh in Irish myth with Lleu law Gyffes in the British Mabinogi was particularly well done. Ms LeFay's grasp of the material, her thinking about the four social functions as related to the myths, and her memory for details in a complex subject matter were all exemplary. She is well-situated to do further advanced work in the Bardic studies of myth and legend.

______________________________________________

Example #8:

Beginning Sculpture

Sculpting techniques in ceramics, issues and concepts related to the body and its representation, approaches to the artistic process, the relationship of contemporary art to studio practice.

Morgan's sculpting skills in this course were very good, her glazing and conceptual skills showed steady improvement over the term. Her fish sculpture showed very good use of texture and visually interesting form. A suggestion is that she take more risks with sculpture by working on more challenging forms and concepts. Morgan was active in class discussions and participated in firing the kiln.

______________________________________________

Example #9:

Natural History: Independent Study

* * * *

Who Reads Performance Evaluations

Your evaluations of your students will be read by a diverse audience ranging from other instructors at Avalon, the Dean, Chancellor, and the student's academic advisor, to prospective employers and others outside the Center. Most importantly, perhaps, they will be read by the student herself. Thus, you will do well to phrase your assessment with all of these audiences in mind and not say anything that you would not say to the student face-to-face. You would also do well not to imagine you are writing the report to any particular staff person within the Center, such as the Chancellor, Registrar, or other instructors who might be more intimately familiar with the student's work.

Of this wide audience, only the student has had access to instructor feedback, comments, and scores provided during the quarter. Because of this, performance evaluations need to provide the necessary context to be understood by readers who were not in the course, don't have access to course materials or syllabi, and may not be familiar with narrative evaluation generally. This is why a brief outline of the work covered in the course is a good idea. As you see in the above examples, this may take the form of a separate paragraph preceding the actual evaluation, or it may be just a sentence. You may include details about assignments and how they were weighted in calculation of the numerical grade.

Evaluations are not edited by anyone but you. Please adhere to appropriate grammar and stylistic practices and proof-read your submission before sending it to the Registrar. What you write reflects on Avalon Center as a whole. If errors are discovered at a later date or you wish to revise your written evaluation, you will need to arrange this with the Registrar and inform the student of the reasons for your changes.

Appropriate and Inappropriate Content

Your evaluations of student work should describe the quality of student performance in your class. Comments not germane to student performance are not acceptable in performance evaluations. For example, "Franklin is very bright but did not commit sufficient effort to this course" does not document performance and is, at best, conjecture. It is better to let the student's work speak for itself, for example, "Franklin's work was uneven. Two papers were inspired and superbly crafted while the other two were sloppily assembled and perfunctory."

Similarly, "Fiona did not do well on the midterm as the result of a severe case of flu" is not acceptable. The student's personal life outside your class is not being evaluated and must not be placed on a student's permanent record, even if you do take such things into account when determining the student's course grade. Instead of supplying personal information about the student's situation, substitute the phrase, "circumstances beyond his/her control," in cases where you think such explanation is absolutely necessary.

Student ability, health, physical or learning disabilities, religious and political beliefs, and the like, are never considerations in student assessment and have no place in performance evaluations.

Students have the right to initiate grievances for performance evaluations that they feel are based on criteria other than academic performance or that apply academic criteria in an arbitrary or capricious way that does not reflect student performance in relation to course requirements. So, obviously, you must not engage in criticism of the student's personality or attitudes except as you genuinely feel they affect his or her performance. Moreover, your words should justify and support the numerical grade you have given and they should be consistent with the expectations and requirements stated in your course syllabus. You are bound to make your expectations and the basic requirements for a grade of 2 clear in your syllabus and in each assignment.

Explicit mention of numerical grades on individual assignments or course components in performance evaluations should be avoided. The final numerical grade will be on the student's record and the purpose of a written evaluation is to supplement the conventional numerical notation. Your goal should be to represent the student performance and work in words and in some significant detail. To fall into the conventional language of "A work" or "B work" or even such vagaries as "very good work" and "excellent work" would defeat the purpose of producing a written evaluation. Your readers will want more than that. In what way is it "excellent"? What were your basic expectations, and how did this student exceed them?

Likewise, think carefully about using the terms "average" and "above average." If you structure your tests in such a way that they are objective and reduced to numerical measurement of performance, and if your class has a fairly large number of students, then this kind of language has a place (e.g., as in the Physical Geology example above). However, evaluating individual students mathematically in relation to a peer group is a method that came into education from the realm of factory production. Using such language, it is difficult not to treat students more as "products" than people and more as cogs in the machine of industrial productivity than learners growing as individual souls. It is especially misleading to use such terms as "average" and "above average" in a vague and subjective way.

Mentioning other students in the evaluation of someone else is not acceptable. Your comments need to focus on the individual student's work and not compare theirs to anyone else in the class. Remember that many of the people reading your comments will not know the other students. If group work is involved, you should comment on each student's participation and role in the group work separately.

Pay attention to your tone. Try not to sound angry or even overly ecstatic. Your readers are likely to be more interested in an objective and balanced account and will want the tone to reflect that attitude. You may be tempted to write as if you are addressing only the student, and so fall into a more personal tone that in appropriate. You may choose whether to refer to the student by their given name or their surname but you should probably avoid using their magical name, even if they used it openly in class. The student's record is organized around their legal name and for both consistency and privacy, you should keep to those forms of address appropriate to people outside of the Center. Using the student's given name creates a tone of familiarity, but can also sound slightly patronizing and overly familiar. Using the student's surname with Mr or Ms can sound either formal or distant. Either approach is acceptable. Just be consistent.

Finally, each evaluation should be accompanied by a standard description of what was covered in your course. This may be more specific than the catalog description but must be more brief than the description in your syllabus. It should give information about the classwork that is applicable to all students in the class and does not vary from student to student. Typical content includes the scope of the course, textbooks used, a breakdown of assignments, quizzes, and exams, etc. This description must be 60 words or fewer in length.

Adjectives and Grades

It is perhaps worth noting here again that grades of zero are best reserved for work that has not been turned in at all. It is true that in high schools and colleges some teachers will use a letter grade of "F" (often meaning "Failure") for work that is inept and completely unacceptable. Avalon's faculty, however, are asked to employ a numerical system, not to be confused with the traditonal letter grades. If students hand in work that is clearly unsatisfactory it is wise to let them revise their work or even assign extra work for them to do with the same material rather than simply issuing a zero. Our goal is to help students to learn and perform well, not merely to issue rewards and punishments. Unless a student is truly unengaged and does not care about your course, you should make an effort to help them do work that at least meets the basic requirements and expectations of your course as defined in your syllabus. At Avalon, grades of 1 and zero are most likely to be given to students who do not hand in all the required work for a course and so cannot be said to "meet the basic requirements of the course."

Remember, wise teacher, that when you write a narrative evaluation for your student, you are engaged in a real writing project, one that will be read by others and will be preserved permanently as a representation of an important and formative experience in the life of your student. To be vague and perfunctory in such a task would be an affront. Be concise, but be precise and convey something meaningful. Give your reader a clear indication of what kind of work your student did in your class and its quality. Give the student an indication of ways to improve and grow in the future, a sense of his or her strengths and weaknesses, not in a tone of critique so much as in a tone of nurturing and encouragement, as you might use with any fair growing thing you encounter in your path.