James K. Brewer
Florida State University

Abstract: This paper makes the case that grading on the curve is not grading, but quota setting, and is tantamount to having no standards, which are crucial to grading. Particular attention is given to the nonacademic reasons instructors give for curve grading while criticizing the use of theoretical distributions in assigning grades.

Citation: Brewer, J. K. (1994). Grading on the curve: an oxymoron? Florida Journal of Educational Research, 34(1), 46-50.

Download:  Brewer.341.pdf (1670 downloads )

Linda S. Behar
University of Florida

Abstract: There is a paucity of research concerning the knowledge base requirements for curriculum specialists enrolled in programs of professional preparation. However, curriculum specialists are frequently responsible for planning, implementing, and evaluating the curriculum. Understanding the relationship between the relevance of what is taught in higher education curriculum programs and school-based curriculum processes can be explored in part by assessing the relationship between course requirements in doctoral curriculum departments. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of correspondence within course requirements among curriculum departments in the United States and to assess what steps are being taken to ensure that curriculum specialists are being trained to meet the challenges associated with increasingly diverse student populations. A summary of the course requirements in curriculum programs and an analysis of the thematic content of action plans that universities had written is reported. Overall, the findings suggest that there is little evidence to support the existence of a core of courses that characterize doctoral programs.

Citation: Behar, L. S. (1994). An analysis of course requirements and action plans within doctoral curriculum departments. Florida Journal of Educational Research, 34(1), 31-45.

Download:  Behar.341.pdf (842 downloads )

Roger E. Wilk
University of South Florida

Abstract: This study compares the results of applying two commonly used methods of adjusting classroom tests when items are found to be too difficult: (I) dropping difficult items or (2) adding bonus points to the original score. Undergraduate teacher education students in a required measurement class were given the same five achievement tests during the fall (n = 54) and spring (n = 54) semesters. Four methods of adjusting students’ scores were applied: two methods dropped items from the test based on the difficulty value and rescored the tests, and two methods added a bonus percent to the unadjusted total score. Although correlations among semester percentage grades for the different methods were all above .97, only the addition of bonus points maintained the order of the students on the original test. The agreement among the methods in assigning letter grades (90 = A, etc.) varied from 13 to 93%. The effect of dropping items on the content validity and the reliability varied among the unit tests, depending on the characteristics of the items dropped.

Citation: Wilk, R. E. (1993). Scoring classroom achievement tests: what to do with the hard items? Florida Journal of Educational Research, 33(1), 21-30.

Download:  Wilk.331.pdf (1187 downloads )

Susan N. Kushner
University of South Florida

Lou M. Carey
University of South Florida

James O. Carey
University of South Florida

Mona M. Jensen
Palm Beach County Schools

Catherine Emihovich and Students
Florida State University

Abstract: The editor of this journal sent me an advance copy of Wesley’s Davis’ article asking if I would be interested in writing a response, no doubt since my voice was one of those “pronouncements from an awesomely elevated professorial perch” that Mr. Davis apparently found so irksome. In the spirit of one of the best attributes of a particular form of qualitative research, ethnography, in that it seeks to construct meaning from a multitude of voices, I have chosen to include the voices of my students enrolled in a course I taught in the summer of 1993, Advanced Methods of Qualitative Research. Their thoughtful comments and insights are a better testament to how this research paradigm leads to a greater understanding of schools and children’s learning than any I can provide. Mr. Davis’ worst fears about teachers conducting research may be alleviated since several students in the class were teachers (past and present) who are using their knowledge of classrooms as a basis for formulating their research questions. This article is a compilation of voices who strongly contest Mr. Davis’ contentions; my role in this rebuttal is to act as an interlocutor to selected portions of the students’ responses. Since qualitative research often features the organization of data by thematic categories, the students’ responses are organized into four major themes: the nature of research, the construction of meaning, the question of validity, and textual strategies for writing up social science research.

Citation: Emihovich, C. (1993). Voices from the perch: an orchestrated response to Davis. Florida Journal of Educational Research, 33(1), 10-20.

Download:  Emihovich.33.1.pdf (1011 downloads )