LCC PERFORMANCE MEASURES

A STUDY

English 100 Class Grades

Table of Contents

Abstract……………………………………………………………… ii

Introduction

Background…………..…………………………………………. 1

Purpose and Questions………………………………………….. 3

Procedures

Population and Sample Size……………………………………. 4

Data Collection and Analysis …………………………..……… 5

Findings/Results…………………………………………………….. 6

Conclusion/Recommendations……………………………………… 13

Appendix: Raw Data…………….…………………………………. 15

Abstract

This study of Leeward Community College’s (LCC) English 100 class grades was undertaken as part of the College’s 2000 Self-Study for accreditation by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). In the Self-Study’s Standard Four: Educational Programs, there was a concern about the academic rigor of all of the College’s courses and programs. To address that concern, one of the Accreditation Team members recommended that the consistency of the grades given for one specific course be examined. Because English 100 is a required course for a degree throughout the University of Hawaii (UH) System and because the data on this course were plentiful, English 100 was selected for this study.

The database for this study consisted of 380 LCC English 100 classes taught over a four-year period. A quantitative approach was used to compare the Grade Point Averages (GPA’s) and grades given at LCC with those at other community colleges in the UH System. However, because there were no data on specific courses available at the system level and because there were varying definitions of the N grade, the comparisons suffered from internal validity problems. Descriptive Statistics were used to determine frequency counts, percentages, means, and standard deviations. Correlation Analysis was used to determine the strength of relationship between F and N grades.

The findings suggest that there was some degree of rigor associated with the College's English 100 course, with the College’s average GPA approximating the System’s average GPA. However, a closer examination of individual grade distributions revealed possible inconsistencies in the grading practices among individual instructors at LCC. The English 100 grades were more dispersed than expected, and they also revealed some anomalies that indicated dichotomous grading trends. In the case of the F and N grades, the data suggested that there was uneven application of these two grades, with the possibility of a strong negative correlation between them.

The recommendations were that (1) this study be shared with all English 100 instructors so that they can evaluate their own individual grading practices in relation to the study’s findings; (2) data on specific benchmark courses such as English 100 be collected systemwide so that more valid comparisons can be made across campuses and over time; and (3) campus-wide discussions of F and N grades be held so that more consensus concerning their definitions and applications can be developed.

A Study on

English 100 Class Grades

Introduction

Background

English 100 is one of the few requirements at Leeward Community College (LCC) and within the University of Hawaii (UH) System that all students must pass in order to graduate with an Associate's or Bachelor's degree. This course is also the prerequisite for many 100- and 200-level courses in other subject areas, including those awarding Writing Intensive credit. On all UH campuses, students must complete English 100 during their first 24 credits or enroll in a basic or developmental writing course leading to that college transfer level course. To succeed in college, it is assumed that students must be able to write well, and having students produce well-reasoned, clearly written compositions is one of the main goals of English 100. At LCC, listed in the Schedule of Courses every semester are usually more sections of English 100 than any other course. Given its importance and great amount of available data, English 100 was selected as the course to analyze for this prototype study of class grades.

The final grades given by instructors and received by students at the end of a semester should indicate and reflect the students' mastery of the course's goals and objectives. As stated on page 19 in the 1999-2000 Leeward Community College General Catalog, "Grades signify the various levels of achievement in carrying out the performance objectives of the course" assigned by instructors using "such methods as written papers, participation in class discussion, performance on assigned projects, and mid-term and final examinations.” A indicates "excellent achievement" and carries 4 Grade Points; B indicates "above average achievement" and carries 3 Grade Points; C indicates "average achievement" and carries 2 Grade Points; D indicates "minimal passing achievement" and carries 1 Grade Point; and F indicates "less than minimal passing" and carries 0 Grade Points. I (Incomplete) indicates that students did not complete a small but significant part of the coursework, but it is only a temporary grade that automatically converts into one of the preceding grades after a given date. W (Withdrawal) indicates that students formally withdrew from a course by a specific deadline. At LCC, this is usually about a month before the end of the semester, and the W grade carries 0 Grade Points and 0 credits.

These grades are the traditional and standard ones, but the College also has a unique N grade that “is used to indicate that the student has made progress in the course (learning has occurred) and demonstrated sustained effort, but has not yet reached a level of accomplishment which will allow for an evaluation” (pp. 19-20). (Community colleges in the UH System, except for Kapiolani CC, award N grades with varying meanings.) Like the W, the N grade carries 0 Grade Points and 0 credits and therefore does not affect students' Grade Point Averages (GPA's). Some faculty regard the N grade as a non-punitive F.

According to the College’s General Catalog, a student’s GPA (or GPR, Grade Point Ratio) is calculated “by dividing the total number of his/her grade points by the total number of course credits for which the student received the grades A, B, C, D, or F. The grade points a student earns for a course are computed by multiplying the number of credits that the course is worth by the grade points assigned to the grade that the student receives for the course (i.e., 4 for A, 3 for B, 2 for C, 1 for D, and 0 for F). Courses for which the grades of CR, NC, CE, W, N, I, and AU have been recorded are not included in the computation of ratios” (p. 20).

For example, if a student receives a C for a 3-credit course and an F for another 3-credit course, his/her GPA would be 1.0, or the equivalent of a D average. This is calculated by first multiplying the points assigned to each grade by the credits assigned to each course (2 points for a C times 3 credits = 6, and 0 points for an F times 3 credits = 0), and then adding these figures (6 plus 0 = 6 total grade points) to obtain the total grade points. Lastly, the total grade points (6) are divided by the total course credits (2 courses times 3 credits each = 6) to obtain the GPA; 6 divided by 6 = 1.

In another example, if a student receives a C for a 3-credit course and an N for another 3-credit course, his/her GPA would be 2.0, or the equivalent of a C average. This is calculated by multiplying the points assigned to each grade by the credits assigned to each course (2 points for a C times 3 credits = 6, but an N has no points and no credits assigned). The total grade points are therefore 6. Lastly, the total grade points (6) are divided by the total course credits (1 course times 3 credits = 3) to obtain the GPA; 6 divided by 3 = 2.

In some cases, grades may be affected by other factors besides the assigned projects, test scores, and class participation, e.g., personal problems, motivation, progress, and priorities. While it is hoped that, as evidence of equitable treatment and academic rigor, there is consistency and reliability among different instructors teaching multiple sections of the same course, in reality, there will always be judgments made and grades given to fit individual and unusual circumstances. Such judgments probably occur more frequently in English than in math classes because grading essays is usually more subjective than grading computational problems.

However, while grades may not correlate perfectly with student competency and achievement, they are frequently used by researchers as a valid measurement of these constructs. Also, at this time grades are the only data available for making comparisons among classes and instructors and over time. Some data on grades across all UH campuses already exist and are published in the University of Hawaii’s Management and Planning Support (MAPS) report “Distribution of Grades, Credits Earned Ratios, Course Completion Ratios, and Current Grade Point Ratios." However, the grades are not broken down into division, course, or class levels. Consequently, the MAPS reports do not provide the specific and discrete information necessary to compare English 100 grades at Leeward Community College with English 100 grades at other community colleges in the UH System.

Purposes and Questions

This study was undertaken for several reasons. The immediate impetus was the College's accreditation Self-Study currently being written and the need to answer a question posed by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC): "How do we determine the 'academic rigor' of our College's courses?" One "good practice" suggestion made by a member of the Accreditation Commission was consistency in grading practices, which led to the following questions:

1. What is the GPA (Grade Point Average) of Leeward Community College's English 100 course?

2. How does the College's GPA compare with the GPA of other community colleges in the System?

3. Is there consistency in grading practices among the College's English 100 instructors?

In its 1994 Evaluation Report, the Accreditation Team concluded that there was "confusion and uneven application" of the punitive F and non-punitive N grades in the courses taught at LCC (p. 6), and we wanted to see if this is true for English 100. So another question was added to the list.

4. Does there appear to be uneven application of the F and N grades in English 100?

While much research is being done for the College's 2000 Self-Study after this year, there will still be a great need for on-going, wide-ranging, long-term data collection and analysis of the College's courses and programs. Although individual instructors probably keep records of the final grades they assign, and all grades for all courses taught at the College are stored in the College's computer system for at least five years, there has been a lack of easily accessible data and published information about the College's courses and programs that all stakeholders can read and respond to. Consequently, it has been rather difficult for faculty and administrators to describe, generalize, and make changes to or predictions about specific courses and classes. With the recent hiring of a full-time Institutional Researcher by the College, it is hoped that more reasonable and collaborative decisions based on more solid data and information can now be made.

This study is an initial step towards that goal, not only by sharing and analyzing data previously buried in the computer system, but also by formulating questions and developing procedures to turn the data into useful information. If some questions about English 100 can be answered now, then perhaps other questions about English 100 can be answered later. With more answers may also come more changes in the College's programs, courses, and classes that will benefit our students.

Procedures

Population and Sample Size

For this quantitative study, all of Leeward Community College's English 100 classes at the Pearl City campus and the Waianae site were considered as the population. The sample consisted of all English 100 classes taught during the regular academic year (fall and spring semesters, but not summer and winter sessions) from Fall 1995 to Spring 1999. Data previous to these four academic years were not available in the historical records of the College's computer system, and the Fall 1999 semester was still in session when the data were extracted from the database.

The resulting sample was 380 English 100 classes taught over four years. While there are always threats to internal validity and factors that may affect the grades and GPA's of specific classes (e.g., "the class from hell" or "the best class ever"), a large sample size tends to control these threats, normalize these differences, and support the validity and reliability of the study.

Data Collection and Analysis

The English 100 class grades were extracted from Aldrich, the College's central computer system, using a grade report data extraction program written by the LCC Computer Center personnel. If there were unusual grades in Aldrich, e.g., CR (Credit), NC (No Credit), and AU (Audit), because these grades are so rare and not part of the accepted method for calculating the GPA, they were excluded from the analysis. (See pages 15-22, Table 9, for raw data.)

The reports were downloaded via ASCII files to the Institutional Researcher’s desktop computer and then transferred into Excel and Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) programs. To protect the confidentiality of the faculty, the Researcher recoded the data to remove any identifying codes or nomenclature that would indicate the instructors and the times and locations of the classes.

Four years of historical data were analyzed using Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis. Descriptive Statistics were used to determine frequency counts and percentages, means, and standard deviations. Correlation Analysis was used to compare the number of F grades with the number of N grades and to determine the strength of this relationship. All calculations were made using computer programs.

Findings/Results

College and System GPA's

Using the grades of the 380 English 100 classes taught over the last four years as the database, Table 1 shows the College's English 100 course average GPA's for the specific semesters and the overall average course GPA for the four-year period.

Table 1: LCC English 100 GPA’s

Semester	# of Classes	GPA
Fall 95	50	2.57
Spring 96	43	2.66
Fall 96	56	2.68
Spring 97	47	2.63
Fall 97	50	2.71
Spring 98	47	2.93
Fall 98	43	2.64
Spring 99	44	2.58
	Total 380	Avg 2.68

As mentioned in this study's introduction, the UH MAPS reports do not provide GPA's for specific courses taught at any of the community colleges. Therefore, the GPA's for all the 100-200 level General & Pre-professional courses taught at all seven community colleges, which include LCC's English 100 course, were used as benchmarks to measure the consistency and academic rigor of LCC's English 100 course. Although this comparison between one specific course and a broad range of courses may not be completely valid, the more general GPA's were the best benchmarks available. The data for Table 2 were taken from the MAPS report "UH-Community Colleges, Distribution of Grades, Credits Earned Ratios, Course Completion Ratios and Current Grade Point Ratios." (Spring data were unavailable.)