A rational approach to standard transformed scores which always results in the numerical to letter grade correspondence A(90 & above), B(80-89.99), C(70-79.99), D(60-69.99), and F(59.99 & below) for any chosen hypothetical grade distribution model is developed. The basic model is extended to an ability adjusted standard transformed scores model with the same numerical to letter grade correspondence. Numerical examples are used to illustrate both models and to give insight into a number of other possible grade distribution alternatives.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ebel, R. L. (1972). Essentials of education measurement. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
2.
Ebel, R. L. (1974). Marks and marking systems. (1974). IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. E-17, No. 2, 76-92.
3.
Noll, W. H. and Scannell, D. P. (1972). Introduction to education measurement. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
4.
Payne, D. A. (1974). The assessment of learning. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Co.
5.
Thomas, C. R. (1981, June). Assigning grades more fairly. ASEE 89th Annual Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2, pp. 705-715.
6.
Thomas, C. R. (1984, June). Determination and utilization of reliability of composite score. ASEE 92nd Annual Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2, pp. 765-771.
