From mad markers and grade grubbers to literate
assessors: A conceptual change model
and practical implications

Everyone complains about grading, but this session suggests ways to improve it. The need to award grades often compromises the educational process, turning students into 'grade grubbers' rather than learners, and teachers into 'markers' rather than educators. Grades are educational currency, like it or not. They have acquired symbolic meanings and are bartered for admission to further degrees, scholarships, awards and employment. The context and conditions in which grades are produced are fundamental, but little-understood components of their meaning that shape and are shaped by those who 'produce' them and those whose 'products' are graded. Grading is typically governed by institutional policies that have 'fairness and accountability' as their basis, rather than the accuracy, consistency and validity of the grades themselves. Policy makers are rarely literate in educational measurement; academic assessors are not sufficiently literate in designing and conducting grading of student learning products. All these "illiteracies" add to the contested nature of the assessment enterprise. While explicit, publicly declared and negotiated learning outcomes and assessment criteria are attempts to address students' need for transparency and institutional angst about 'grade inflation,' a deeper approach is required. All stakeholders need higher levels of 'assessment literacy,' including those who design assessment policies, tasks and grading schemes, and especially teachers and students. This interactive session proposes a comprehensive model of 'grading literacy' and suggests practical implications for students, teaching staff, managers -- and academic developers alike.