Do grades contaminate student evaluations of instruction?

Abstract

The correlation between grades and student satisfaction has been interpreted as providing support for belief in a grading leniency bias hypothesis. That is, easy graders are assumed to receive better evaluations than hard gradersbecause they are easy graders. Howard and Maxwell have demonstrated that the relationship between grades and satisfaction might be viewed as an expected result of important causal relationships of other variables (student motivation and progress in the course) with satisfaction and grades, rather than simply evidence of contamination due to grading leniency. Eighty-three students in a research methodology course provided data at two points in a semester. Cross-lagged panel correlation analysis was employed to ascertain the direction of casuality in the relationship between student satisfaction and grades. The findings replicate the Howard and Maxwell path analytic results in finding no evidence that a grades-influencing-satisfaction interpretation is more likely than its opposite, namely, a satisfaction-causing-grades one. The weak relationship between grades and student satisfaction, and the study's inability to find evidence to impugn a satisfaction-causing-grades interpretation of that relationship, renders the grade contamination objection to student evaluations even less poignant.