The Dea(r)th of Student Responsibility

College Teaching

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 2-13

  Hassel, Holly ^a   Lourey, Jessica ^b  

^a University of Wisconsin Fox Valley   (United States)

^b Alexandria Technical College   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84964465319     PISSN: 87567555     EISSN: 19308299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/CTCH.53.1.2-13     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. McDougall, D., and C. Granby. 1997. Effects of expectations of questioning method on educational majors' preparation for class. Education 117 (3): 349–55.
2. Barrowman, C. 1996. Improving teaching and learning effectiveness by defining expectations. New Directions for Higher Education 36(4): 103–14.
3. Black, S. 1999. Are letter grades enough? American School Board Journal 186(12): 38–41.
4. Friedman, P., F. Rodriguez, and J. McComb. 2001. Why students do and do not attend class. College Teaching 49 (4): 124–33.
5. Gaultney, J. F., and A. Cann. 2001. Grade expectations. Teaching of Psychology 28 (2): 84–87.
6. Brown, William. 2002. Why I don't let students cut my classes. In Foundations: A reader for new college students, ed. V. Gordon and T. Minnick, 100–2. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
7. Cheng, Z. 2003. Re: History of letter grade system. E-mail to Holly Hassel, April 30.
8. Chickering, A. 2000. Creating community within individual courses. New Directions for Higher Education 109:23–32.
9. Clayton, M. 1998. Give me an "A" professor—I'll give you one, too. Christian Science Monitor 90 (70): B6.
10. College Art Association. Standards for retention and tenure of visual arts faculty.
11. College Board. College-bound seniors 1997. Press release: College-bound seniors 1997. http://www.collegeboard.com/press/senior97/970826.html.
12. Cronon, W. 1998. "Only connect..": The goals of a liberal education. American Scholar 67 (4): 73–80.
13. Association of Departments of English. ADE policy statement: ADE guidelines for class size and workload for college and university teachers of English: A statement of policy. ADE policy.
14. Norcross, J. C., L. J. Horrocks, and J. F. Stevenson. 1999. Of barfights and gadflies: Attitudes and practices concerning extra credit in college courses. Teaching of Psychology 16 (4): 199–203.
15. Parsons, M. H. 2000. Facilitating learner-centered instruction: Technology simulations, and scans. 7th Annual Community College Showcase, Ocean City, Maryland.
16. Rosenthal, R., and E. Y. Babad. 1985. Pygmalion in the gymnasium. Educational Leadership 43 (1): 36–39.
17. Rosenthal, R., and L. Jacobson. 1968. Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
18. About Campus Schilling, K. M., and K. L. Schilling. 1999. Increasing expectations for student effort. 4, no. 2 (May–June): 4–10.
19. Culbertson, L. D., and M. R. Jalongo. 1999. But what's wrong with letter grades?: Responding to parents' questions about alternative assessment. Childhood Education 75 (3): 130–35.
20. Delucchi, M., and W. L. Smith. 1997. A postmodern explanation of student consumerism in higher education. Teaching Sociology 25 (4): 322–27.
21. Edwards, C. H., 2000. Grade inflation: The effects on educational quality and personal well being. Education 120 (3): 546–48.
22. Eklund-Myrskog, G. 1997. Students' views of learning in vocational education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 41 (2): 179–88.
23. Fram, E. H., and R. Pearse. 2000. Tough love teaching generates student hostility. College Teaching 48 (2): 42.
24. Goulden, N. R., and C. J. G. Griffin. 1997. Comparison of university faculty and student beliefs about the meaning of grades. Journal of Research and Development in Education 31 (1): 27–37.
25. Greenwald, A. G., and G. M. Gillmore. 1997. Grading leniency is a removable contaminant of student ratings. American Psychologist 52 (11): 1209–17.
26. Juarez, T. 1996. Why any grades at all, father? Phi Delta Kappan 77 (5): 374–77.
27. Krogness, M. M. 1996. Giving grades: Laying an arcane ritual to rest. Voices from the Middle 3 (4): 23–26.
28. Landrum, R. E. 1999. Student expectation of grade inflation. Journal of Research and Development in Education 32 (2): 124–28.
29. McGrath, M. M., and A. Braunstein. 1997. The prediction of freshman attrition: An examination of the importance of certain demographic, academic, financial, and social factors. College Student Journal 31 (3): 396–408.
30. Merton, R. K. 1948. The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Review 8:193–210.
31. Munk, D. D., and W. D. Bursuck. 1997-98. Can grades be helpful and fair? Educational Leadership 44 (4): 44–47.
32. National Council of Teachers of English. Statement on class size and teacher workload: College. NCTE Positions and Guidelines.
33. Arnold, M. 1902. Literature and dogma. New York: New Amsterdam Book Co.
34. Association of American Colleges and Universities. Statement on liberal learning. About AACU: Statement on liberal learning.
35. Abou-Sayf, F. 1996. An investigation of different grading practices: Reliability, validity, and related psychometric considerations. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College 4(1): 39–47.
36. Seligman, D. 2002. The grade-inflation swindle. Forbes, March 18, 94.
37. Share, C. 1997. Implications of considering students as consumers. College Teaching 45 (4): 122.
38. St. Clair, K. L., 1999. A case against compulsory class attendance policies in higher education. Innovative Higher Education 23:171–80.
39. Trout, P. 1997. Disengaged students and the decline of academic standards. Academic Questions 10, no. 2 (Spring): 46–56.
40. Wiesenfeld, K. 1996. Making the grade. Newsweek, June 17, 16.
41. College Student Retention Landrum, R. E. 2001-03. The responsibility for retention: Perceptions of students and university personnel. 3 (2): 195–212.
42. Marburger, D. R. 2001. Absenteeism and undergraduate exam performance. Journal of Economic Education 32:99–109.
43. Laska, J. A., and T. Juarez. 1992. Grading and marking in American schools: Two centuries of debate. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
44. Schwartzman, R. 1995. Are students customers? The metaphoric mismatch between management and education. Education 116 (2): 215–22.
45. Ansburg, P. I. 2001. Student expectations of workload and grade distribution by class difficulty. Paper presented at the 109th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.