Grading System - Grace Hardison TEFL University

The Grading System of the University

Our grading system is a comprehensive evaluation of your assignments, and as such your Official Transcript will reflect both the UK module marks as well as the US 4.0 GPA system. From our experience this helps your future employers ease of reference in terms of your overall academic performance.

UK Grades to 4.0 GPA Scale : According to Fullbright US- UK Commission

UK module marks	UK degree classification	GPA
70+	First-class honours	4.0
65-69	Upper-second class honours	3.7
60-64	Upper-second class honours	3.3
55-59	Lower-second class honours	3.0
50-54	Lower-second class honours	2.7
45-49	Third class honours	2.3
40-44	Third class honours	2.0
35-39	Ordinary/Unclassified	1.0
Below 35	Ordinary/Unclassified	0.0

Course Assessment

Context (Background and Rubric)

Living in an information-driven society, students need to construct their meaning and apply what they have learned in new situations. To do so, they need to learn to think critically about knowledge and the world.

Thus, academic success should go beyond achieving grades to developing reflective minds that can search for and evaluate information, solve problems, and learn through interacting and collaborating with others.

At Grace Hardison TEFL University, we have implemented an assessment-based evaluation approach to assess the learning of our students. It is conducive to learning online/correspondence and, more importantly, facilitates assessment advanced by the perennial need for a work-life balance of our students.

We assess our students with assigned coursework (assignments) to read their writing and work skills, discernment of the subject, and overall success in their course.

Formative assessment helps students during the learning process by enabling them to reflect on their challenges and growth so they may improve.

By analyzing students’ performance through formative assessment and sharing the results with them, we help students understand their strengths and weaknesses and reflect on how they need to improve over their remaining studies.

With this in mind we have taken due cognizance of some of the distinct benefits of assignment-based evaluation:

Enhances cognitive and analytical capabilities

The rational reasoning of students is strengthened. Assignments offer students a chance to experiment while becoming unconventional.

Learners become research-oriented

Through their assignments, students are required to carry out an in-depth study of their specific topic. Research on their assignment experience also enhances the student’s practical and thought-provoking skills at a professional level.

Increases cognizance and understanding about the topic

Assignments allow students become more aware of various insightful principles and perspectives through their coursework, which ultimately leads to the rational development of a framework for their topic.

Improves the technical writing skills

Students are likewise expected to compose their assignments in the form of reports and on a certain study or scenario. The writing skills and talents are strengthened in this way.

Value Rubric

The rubrics (See framework hereunder), articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment.

The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared through a common dialog and understanding of student success.

This rubric is designed for use with many different types of assignments and the suggestions here are not an exhaustive list of possibilities.

The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only.

Ambiguity: Information that may be interpreted in more than one way.
Assumptions: Ideas, conditions, or beliefs (often implicit or unstated) that are “taken for granted or accepted as true without proof.” (quoted from www.dictionary.reference.com/ browse/ assumptions)
Context: The historical, ethical. political, cultural, environmental, or circumstantial settings or conditions that influence and complicate the consideration of any issues, ideas, artifacts, and events.
Literal meaning: Interpretation of information exactly as stated. For example, “she was green with envy” would be interpreted to mean that her skin was green.
Metaphor: Information that is (intended to be) interpreted in a non-literal way. For example, “she was green with envy” is intended to convey an intensity of emotion, not a skin color.

	Capstone 4	Milestones 3 2		Benchmark 1
Explanation of issues	Issue/ problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding.	Issue/ problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.	Issue/ problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/ or backgrounds unknown.	Issue/ problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.
Evidence Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion	Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/ evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly.	Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/ evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning.	Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/ evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning.	Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/ evaluation. Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question.
Influence of context and assumptions	Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others’ assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position.	Identifies own and others’ assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position.	Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others’ assumptions than one’s own (or vice versa).	Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position.
Student’s position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis)	Specific position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue. Limits of position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis) are acknowledged. Others’ points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis).	Specific position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue. Others’ points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis).	Specific position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue.	Specific position (perspective, thesis/ hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious.
Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences)	Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority.	Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.	Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes are identified clearly.	Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.