Abstract
One of the least favorite duties of many instructors is grading. Most are expected not only to give grades on assignments and in the course, but also to provide an explicit rationale for the way grades are assigned. To determine grades, it is recommended that instructors establish standards of quality and follow those standards. They must decide what is excellent, very good, satisfactory, below satisfactory, and unsatisfactory performance in assignments and in the course in general.
In the speech course, grading is often complicated by the nature of assignments and the diversity of speakers and audiences. Student approaches to speech assignments are often deeply involved in personal character, experience, and culture. They have few "right" or "wrong" answers and even empirically "correct" assignments may fall short of the goal of excellence. A piece may be judged as much by the usefulness of its message for human beings as by its technical proficiency. As such, individual speeches and compositions are difficult if not impossible to judge without considering their authors, contexts, and audiences.
Journal Title
Iowa Journal of Communication
Volume
28
Issue
2
First Page
3
Last Page
24
Language
en
File Format
application/pdf
Recommended Citation
Peterson, Valerie
(1996)
"The Fragility of Goodness in the Classroom: Nussbaum's Contribution to Evaluation and Grading,"
Iowa Journal of Communication: Vol. 28:
No.
2, Article 3.
Available at:
https://scholarworks.uni.edu/ijc/vol28/iss2/3
Copyright
©1996 Iowa Communication Association
