Skip to content
  • Home
  • About the Editors
  • AMS.org
← Evaluating Evaluations
20 Questions–Job Interview, or First Date? →

Extra! Extra! Read all about it!

Posted on October 15, 2019 by kthompson

Why did the undergraduates cross the road?

Extra credit.

In concept as well as in practice, I have never understood extra credit. As someone who was home-schooled by a former Catholic high-school principal, “extra credit” was never a part of my pre-college vernacular [In fact, while telling her about this blogpost, my mother asked what a “paper or exam rewrite” was.]. In undergrad, not a single professor used those words in class (perhaps students made deals with professors privately, but I was blissfully unaware.).

At UGA students would request extra credit. They would ask in class usually as I was handing back an exam. I’d also get pleas via email the last week of class as students saw their grades going into the final. I read these situations—I think pretty accurately—as attempts to get a higher numerical score than the one actually earned. It read as an act of desperation and one which placed grades above actual mastery of content. Thankfully, as a grad student let alone as someone teaching a micromanaged coordinated course, I didn’t have that much choice in the matter. At most 5% of the students’ grade was up to my discretion and I certainly didn’t have the power to override an exam score or anything like that. 

Back in the days when I gave extra credit.

In time I did start using that 5% wiggle room to offer extra credit before the final exam; I’d give each student a different topic and assign them a certain number of problems on that topic. Only correct submissions would receive credit, and only correct submissions would be scanned to serve partially as a prep packet for the class for the final. In addition to getting students to start studying earlier and to make their own question banks, I realized it made my evals better (hate the game, not the player, right?). It felt mildly dirty and so I no longer give extra credit. Ever. But at the time I convinced myself I was at least teaching students a valuable and transferable study skill. I also thought I needed better teaching evals even though I was already above the department average (but by the way, no student ever mentioned extra credit in my evals one way or the other).

At Davidson, I was exposed to a new type of extra credit: extra credit earned by attending seminars and colloquia. At first I thought this was brilliant. The professor had no additional grading (they also were probably already going to the seminar); the seminar was actually going to be better attended making the speaker feel, and the department look, better; the students would get exposure to new ideas outside the regular classroom and the speaker specifically not being the instructor potentially could make the topic automatically interesting.

Having said that, there were obvious downsides. With few exceptions the ONLY students showing up to seminars were doing so because of extra credit. And even if I were teaching the only section of a course, what my colleagues did in their classes affected what I could do in mine. Because a few were known for giving extra credit for seminar attendance and because it was the culture that going to seminars meant receiving extra credit, it was all but impossible for me to encourage students to go without attaching a similar reward. There was another practical disadvantage: if a student had a class or athletic practice that conflicted with the seminars in question, then that student could never earn the extra credit.

When this is how many exams I’m administering, I’m NOT doing rewrites or extra credit. #Sorrynotsorry

DePaul and Carnegie Mellon and USNA all have a default atmosphere of “stress” that UGA and Davidson lack. At DePaul, most students are commuting and/or working jobs while juggling classes and/or stressing about money (ranging from how to pay for school to how to make rent). Carnegie Mellon is a collection of students who have been the smartest in the room for their entire lives who now realize when they’re all in the same room only one person still holds that title. They are double-majoring, taking overloads, trying to stand out. And at the Naval Academy students wake up around 5:30AM, go to bed maybe at midnight, and really don’t have too much time to themselves (there are “mandatory study hours” every night, but otherwise their day is packed). So whether their grade is attached to keeping a scholarship, keeping their sense of self-worth, keeping from getting reprimanded by a superior/parent, or some combination of the three, these students all are concerned about their grades and at all three places students asked for extra credit.

But part of why these students are performing so poorly (often just in their minds—the most common grade in my experience of students asking for extra credit is “B”) is lack of time (management). They are busier than one-legged tap dancers. Why would they want MORE work in the form of “extra credit”—they’re already demonstrating the baseline level of work is a bit too much to handle? Why would we give them more work when they’re so stressed? When is “extra” work even going to get done?

For these situations and for these often ad-hoc extra assignments, instructors really need to balance quality of assignment with quantity of time to devote to said-assignment. Here are two drastically different examples (from tenured faculty, if it matters) I’ve seen in practice that still floor me:

  • A retake of a (first) exam if a student scored below a 70%, with the greater of the two performances counting but only up to a 70%. While (hopefully?) an opportunity not every student can take advantage of, this takes a lot of time. Students have to (continue to?) study and set aside 50-75 minutes to take the exam again. The instructor has to write a new exam, proctor the exam, and then regrade the exam. If the instructor to minimize schedule conflicts decides to use a class meeting or recitation for this, then the instructor and all students have effectively lost that day.
  • Bonus points on a math test that have absolutely nothing to do with math. Granted, this is a bit of a Catch-22. Many students who “need” the bonus in terms of a grade boost are either not going to have the time to get to the problem, or they’re not going to have the mathematical know-how to complete the problem. The students who do have the time and/or mathematical prowess to complete the bonus probably don’t need it. So then some faculty have completely non-math questions as bonus. And not even non-math trivia, but questions with arguably no incorrect answer. Questions like “What’s the most interesting thing you’ve learned in the course?” Honestly…not a math question. I’ve seen some who do these classic groan-inducers like “If you could be any kind of sandwich, what kind of sandwich would you be and why?” Also…not a math question. Just curve the test if that’s what you want students to do to “up” their grades. Don’t waste everyone’s time.

There is one pro- extra credit argument I have not yet addressed and that’s that extra credit can be an effective psychological and marketing tool to boost student confidence and create a positive environment (c.f., this article which claims traditional exams are such a psychological barrier to learning that pop extra credit quizzes in place of exams actually boost student performance). The opening joke, after all, has some truth to it–students perk up like beagles at the words “extra credit.” Many will put more work into an extra credit assignment than a “standard” one; indeed, it’s well-documented that extra credit can encourage students not to give their all on the first attempt.

I realize that my students are not me. They don’t necessarily learn the same way that I do. They haven’t had the same educational experiences prior to college that I had. Their (mathematical) strengths and weaknesses are not the same as mine. It’s neither logical nor reasonable to expect that what worked for me will work for them. And so even though I never experienced it, maybe my students would benefit pedagogically from extra credit. There must be some reason why more and more tenured college professors do it considering the blatant disadvantages in

  • enforcement (Who is eligible for the extra credit? If just some students, what should the cut off be? When is the extra credit going to be completed? In class? Outside?)
  • development (What exercises are worth their little free time? What exercises are worth your little free time?)
  • emphasis specifically on grades and only secondarily on mastery (How does extra credit make students NOT continue to worry about grades? Is extra credit appropriate if grades are already being curved?)
  • emphasis on course evaluations over any other teaching measure (Do or should instructors give extra credit only when an eval comes around? Is that not putting emphasis on grades and only secondarily on mastery (of teaching)?)
  • impact on the others in the department (If your colleagues give extra credit, how can you not? Once you start giving extra credit, can you ever stop?)

Again: as in total grade value it’s usually negligible and not going to affect the numbers, maybe extra credit is worth a gain in student excitement and emotion. I know there was a post years ago on this by someone asking for extra credit ideas (with many in comments expressing the same concerns I’ve raised). I’d be really curious to hear how/if those writers’ opinions have changed over the years, or if there are new arguments to be made. My gut says this is a bad idea, my head says “if your colleagues are doing it, you’ll have a tough time not joining,” and my mind is open and in fact is aching to see the good.

Because the real question is “When does it end?” Extra credit, rewrites, and retests are rampant pre-college, and are increasing in popularity at the college level–and not just with introductory courses, but even those at the 300 and 400 levels. What happens the first time a student doesn’t have these multiple tries and extra opportunities? If it’s not until grad school, which already pushes people to an emotional and intellectual breaking point, is that good? (see this article on the perfectionism expectation) If it’s not until “the real world” when we’re talking about a salesman pitching a major account to a new and reluctant client or (as I’m led to consider more) an officer on a battleship making decisions that literally cost people lives, is that good?

This entry was posted in classroom design, classroom management, end of semester, exam feedback, extra credit projects, math anxiety, teaching, teaching evaluations and tagged evaluations, extra credit, students, teaching. Bookmark the permalink.
← Evaluating Evaluations
20 Questions–Job Interview, or First Date? →
  • Opinions expressed on these pages were the views of the writers and did not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the American Mathematical Society.

  • Categories

    • active learning
    • AIM
    • attracting math majors
    • AWM
    • balancing research and teaching
    • bias
    • BIRS
    • blogging
    • books
    • cheating
    • CIMPA research school
    • classroom design
    • classroom management
    • classroom response systems
    • collaborations
    • commencement
    • community engagement
    • conferences
    • Contingency plans
    • Creativity
    • dealing with rejection
    • elections
    • end of semester
    • exam feedback
    • extra credit projects
    • Fields medal
    • focussed research group
    • funny things students say
    • giving talks
    • government opportunities
    • grading
    • graduate school
    • grant proposals
    • IAS
    • ICERM
    • ICTP
    • inquiry-based learning
    • interviewing
    • iPad apps
    • IPAM
    • job search
    • joint math meetings
    • math and art
    • math and performance
    • math anxiety
    • math circles
    • math consulting
    • math in the media
    • math in the movies
    • math problems
    • mathematical congress of the americas
    • mathematicians in mass media
    • meeting famous mathematicians
    • mentoring
    • minorities in mathematics
    • MoMath
    • moving
    • Museum of Mathematics
    • networking
    • office hours
    • online homework systems
    • opportunities for faculty
    • organizing a special session
    • outreach
    • parenting
    • PCMI
    • pi day
    • pre-tenure leave
    • pre-tenure reviews
    • public awareness of mathematics
    • quantitative reasoning
    • reading job applications
    • refereeing
    • reimbursements
    • research
    • research collaborations
    • resolutions
    • revising a paper
    • sage
    • science and humanities
    • seminaire bourbaki
    • service
    • social aspects of math life
    • Social situations with students
    • submitting a paper for publication
    • summer school
    • syllabus writing
    • teaching
    • teaching evaluations
    • technology
    • technology for teaching
    • tenure
    • Test-making
    • time management
    • traveling
    • Uncategorized
    • vacation
    • Welcome!
    • women in math
    • work-life balance
    • working in coffee shops
    • workshops
    • World Cup
    • writing letters of recommendation
    • year in review
  • Archives

    • March 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • December 2020
    • November 2020
    • October 2020
    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
    • December 2019
    • November 2019
    • October 2019
    • September 2019
    • August 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • February 2019
    • January 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • August 2014
    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
  • Retired Blogs

    • A Mathematical Word
    • Beyond Reviews: Inside MathSciNet
    • Blog on Math Blogs
    • Capital Currents
    • e-Mentoring Network
    • Graduate Student Blog
    • inclusion/exclusion
    • Living Proof
    • Math Mamas
    • On Teaching and Learning Mathematics
    • PhD + epsilon

Proudly powered by WordPress.