I would prefer to begin with the second last question. Definitely, I see value in learning activities adopted in the classrooms, even if it is not linked to grades or scores.

Although for formative purposes, such activities are usually integrated and provide teachers opportunity to gather evidence of learning while students are engaged in the activity; all learning activities are not intended to serve as assessment activity.

As answer to the last question, learning activities (if has to be used as assessment activities) may range from less formal to more formal methods of assessments. Latter methods usually intend to provide grades (and/or reporting), whereas less formal methods are very effective tool to help teachers form a valid image of learners or students in terms of knowledge, skills, abilities, attitude and values; and plan personalized learning experiences. And this is the role that that such activities can play, without being used to award any score or grade.

To sum up all classroom assessments (or activities) can be used to improve learning, provided we are clear about the purpose and know how to use the information.

Dear all, I propose to flip over the subject: in days passed you had a master and you were his pupil, you were following him step by step and he knew what you were up to at every moment, there was a constant contact. We may not be able to restore this situation fully, but all great skills know such master - pupil relations. So at the end when the pupil realises his masterpiece that represents that he became equal to the master, he himself will start having pupils. This is still possible today, look for it. Best regards and good luck.

In principle, I would say yes. However, context is very important. I would not, for example, like to be treated by a dentist who had not been graded (in a reliable way) for competence in tooth extraction or the necessary skills for providing a safe and secure filling. On the other hand, there are surely areas in life where evaluation, so to speak, is profoundly subjective and ability cannot be rubber-stamped with an A, B or whatever. For example, while I appreciate that many jazz musicians are talented, I cannot stand jazz. On the other hand, I think the East LA band  Los Lobos are A plus most of the time. 

Best wishes Paul

I think there is room for learning activities that are not graded such as teaching students how to learn before they actually undertake formal learning activities. Once students see the importance of such learning to their success in the course, they will be motivated to participate.

many thanks,

Debra

http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun00/howtolearn.aspx

Grades are NOT for us the instructors, grades are NOT for the administrators.  I know that is how they are used which is unfortunate.  But ultimately grades are FOR STUDENTS.  The process of grade evaluation and assignment should be a learning experience in itself.A student at the college level who is not participating after several implicit and explicit attempts to engage him/her will not all of a sudden become engaged. He or she will most likely become concerned with grades the last two weeks of the semester and the "enthusiasm" for extra credit assignments, other activities and the ideas I get presented with are actually very interesting and motivate certain class activities for the next semester.  But this student did not leave my class engaged, and some of my colleagues believe that he/she did, and I saw a pig fly.  That is not to say that I can't engage that student because I have.  And most methods of such intervention, especially the more successful ones, involved no grading, and allowed student freedom to be creative about his contributions, and very often I ask him/her what grade they think I should assign, and 95% of the time it is exactly the grade that I would have assigned. So, let me flip the question slightly:  Is there a role for learning activities that are NOT actively and properly assessed and measured by the instructor?

Such "learning activities" are not special cases, they are still the norm in most older established university, and unfortunately at very established and rigid community colleges where research is non-existent, pedagogy trends arrive two years too late, and the so-called learning activities provide everything but learning.  I am lucky enough to teach and manage curriculum development at one of the most progressive schools in NYC.  But trust me I paid my dues, because in one of my earlier post PhD positions, I had to spend an hour at our mathematics and statistics department meeting explaining the proper use of p-values, and effect size, and instrument validity, it was insane. And some of these same instructors were teaching statistics, and they were tenured, and no one was grading them. Why should the students be out through more scrutiny than the professors?  So, I ask you all again,

Is there a role for learning activities that are NOT actively and properly assessed and measured by the instructor?

Every action, or inaction, is "graded,"  perhaps there is not a formal grade, but as humans we constantly judge everything around us and use that judgement to confirm out bias.  On rare occasions we may use an observation to refute or bias, hut more often than not we look for confirmation. This has been extensively studied in the education literature (Jussim's work is one example). 

So how does this change the question?  Is the a role for learning activities that take place in the absence of structured feedback or self reflection?  One would argue that any evaluation is a measurement against a goal ofstandard; with the suggested corollary that whenever there is a goal or standard there is some sort of evaluation of every action.  The only way to not have an evaluation is to not have an established goal or standard.  

This gives yet another evolution of the question.  Is there a role for learning activities in the absence of established goals or standards? It can happen, however, by creating this environment results in surrendering the goals and objectives to  learner.  The learner by definition does not know what they don't know and are thus are dually burdened in being unskilled and unaware that they need to improve (see Kruger and Dunning "Unskilled and unaware")

Bottom line - there is perhaps a role for education activities that do not result in a formal summit ice evaluation, but without a goal or standards and structured formative evaluation you are wasting resource.

So, I have a quick question , a colleague of mine teaches art history and the role of culture, and vice versa, he includes several activities that simply consist of a museum visit and students are asked to describe what they've seen. He provides feed back. They discuss their observations in class. They are not graded for such assignments. As a matter of fact, since you took out of the pedagogy setting, here's a follow up. I'm a complex dynamics, recently I have begun reading the works of jJudea Pearl, and I have begun a full self driven course in Causal inference.  Who's going to grade me? I'm not being silly, it just seems that you have left out aa big chunk out of you otherwise very well reasoned argument above.

In your first example there is a grade and some would argue a consequence.  The student who comes back from the museum visit excited, engaged, and interactive will in turn engage that teacher who will give them preferential learning opportunities.  They will also be given the benefit of the doubt for missteps since their general "halo" is positive.  The student who comes back having done the minimum and is clearly not engaged will probably not  get the same opportunities, and their failures will only confirm the teachers bias that they are not engaged.  No formal grade - but definitely and affective grade with the potential for significant consequences.

If your second example - you are grading yourself and in doing so making a determination as to how to spend your time.  Some would argue that allocation of time reflects perhaps the most important evaluative measure of all, as time (unlike money) cannot be recovered once lost.  You have set a goal for yourself to accomplish something.  You are making a self assessment of whether you are making progress at an adequate pace using the current curriculum based on the goal you have set for yourself.  A positive self evaluation results in continuing the study in the current curriculum.  A negative self assessment will result in a change of curriculum or discontinuation of study if the cost of acquiring the knowledge becomes higher than the perceived benefit.  

The challenge in this is that without outside feedback you "think" you are making progress, but have no way of knowing for sure - you have no way for knowing what you don't know.  If your metrics are misaligned or biased you could complete the course of study only to find an inability to aptly the knowledge in the desired way.  The fatal flaw in completely self directed learning.  Example - I can study a foreign language using a self study course and think that I sound just like the recordings; however, upon visiting the country I may find that no one can understand me. Bad pronunciation? Wrong dialect? I have no way of knowing without going to an outside source for feedback.

I actually agree with every point you made in your last post. But I think we're diverging from the straight forward question that began this thread to a more meaningful and impactful meaning of "grading" who is essentially what I was arguing. The ability to grade yourself and understand your shortcomings, your talents, desires, time management. All things that may be achieved by a class activity that is not graded in the very particular sense that the original question was asked. So, the issue here is that we agree!  The question needs to be better stated :-)

Yes - I think we are in agreement.

In regards to the original question - yes there is value in a "non-graded" activity as long as there is a declared purpose to the activity (curriculum) and formative (not summative) feedback.  HOWEVER - lack of a formal grade is not necessarily "ungraded"  - affectively, the teacher will always be adjusting their bias town the students (but formal or informal metrics), and unless this is consciously addressed at a metacognitive level by the instructor there is the perhaps unappreciated risk of doing more harm than good since an 'Undeclared evaluation bias" has implications for the learner long term.  So I ask the questions, "Can you have a structured education activity that is truly "ungraded?"  

Agreed and agreed. I think such "grading" should the form of feedback, not punitive or rewarding, just a critique. Both negatives and positives can be included and will benefit the student both short and long term. Unfortunately, (and I keep harping on this because such grading is essential in our roles as educators and academics) many professors would just rather stamp a letter on an assignment than provide meaningful input. The latter takes quite a bit more time and effort, but that is our job. 

On a tangent, those are the same faculty who shout mathematical integrity as a reason for keeping Algebra and Calculus in the general liberal arts curriculum instead of taking the much more progressive alternative of Quantitative Reasoning and Quant. Research Methods, and utilizing software. And this "old school" contingency of faculty are pretty convincing. It took me, as a pure mathematician, a while to accept the fact that my students are much more better served by learning how to construct a budget for a business proposal, or understand the dynamics of an epidemic, than to know how to integrate a double integral by hand. Yes. My preferred method requires more work, more prep, more involvement in learning trends,and very little dependence on a standard textbook with same old irrelevant out of context math problems.  And for those of you who are mathematicians, even actively doing research, when was the last time you evaluated a triple integral by hand? (If you have, you might want to look up Mathematica or Matlab).  I only recently realized that the big motivator is not mathematical integrity, but more often than not, laziness, or the lack of such ability.OK. I'm done venting.  The good news is that the graduate students, especially my teaching fellows get this and are willing to work hard, and are imaginative and creative, and the students keep proving my point. During a recent recent class on comparing payment plans, a student who would be considered "weak" came up with the notion and notation of a function. I structured the problem in a way that doesn't use that word or any functional notation, and the student "made up his own short hand notation", and was amazed that THAT is what a function is, and what a variable is and what the domain is. Granted it took me a few years to build this problem (instead of having the students evaluate f(5), or solving f(x) = y, which is the standard approach). 

It is quite obvious that not all learning activities are graded, whether we take note or not. Of the three domains of educational objectives, it is easier to grade the cognitive and psycho-motor aspects. But the affective domain is not so easy to grade and often times are not. The great outcome is usually for the satisfaction of the teacher that all efforts committed to the teaching/learning exercise was not wasted. However, it may be hazardous if the students are made to know those aspects that are not to be graded. The consequences are that they will be absent or treat them with levity and passiveness.

Is there a role for learning activities that are not evaluated for a grade?

As a teacher, it will be near impossible for you not to 'grade' any learning activity your students are undertaking in your class. While students are engaged in the learning activity, you as the teacher would probably be observing them, engaged in scaffolding learning for those who need it, and  generally being available to answer questions and direct learning when needed. You are inadvertently 'grading'- noting which students excelled, needed help, etc. You might not have assigned a mark for the activity, but you assessed their learning.

Is there a role for learning activities that are not evaluated for a grade?

As a teacher, it will be near impossible for you not to 'grade' any learning activity your students are undertaking in your class. While students are engaged in the learning activity, you as the teacher would probably be observing them, engaged in scaffolding learning for those who need it, and  generally being available to answer questions and direct learning when needed. You are inadvertently 'grading'- noting which students excelled, needed help, etc. You might not have assigned a mark for the activity, but you assessed their learning.

I agree, these learning activities should not be graded.. Otherwise, students get stressed and do not like to get engaged with you in the activities