was about making work, so establishing a trusting environment where students could take risks and make mistakes,
without penalty, was imperative.
A PROPOSAL
On the first day of class, after several fun ice-breaking games, I approached the students with the following
proposal:
I am required to report a grade for you at the end of this course. We can keep the traditional approach of A, B, C, D for
each assignment, OR we can take an alternative approach. The alternative approach involves four parts:
1. All assignments need to be completed
2. Each student must create a final
3. If you accomplish both 1 and 2, you will receive a “P”, meaning Pass; a “P” will translate to an “A” when I report
your grade at the end of the term. In addition, written narratives on your progress will be given at midterm and
with your final evaluation.
4. Failure to do both #1 and #2 will receive an “F’ which doesn’t need translation.
Please don’t answer right away; Come back next class and let me know your opinion. The class needs to come to
consensus on one of the two options.
This was my first experiment: allowing the students to choose the method of evaluation. I was hoping they would
choose the latter, but I was willing to forge ahead if they went with the traditional approach.
When we met the next time, the students were 100% willing to commit to the Pass/Fail alternative. Once the
ground rules were established, a sense of freedom permeated the class. I applauded them for taking this risk, and
emphasized that they hadn’t necessarily taken the easier route. However, they wouldn’t let me back out either, so
on we went.
I won’t go into details of every assignment, but each asked the students to prepare short studies exploring a
prescribed limitation: spatial, financial, physical, aesthetic, or material. The goal was to allow limitations to
heighten creativity; and through practice, to hone creative skills.
STEAMed Magazine
44
October 2016 Edition