text:
What to do about "grade grubbers?"
An annoying aspect of working with a "strict" grading system (e.g., 90%+ = A, 85% = A-, 80% = B+, etc.) is what I call the "grade grubbing" phenomenon: the people who feel compelled to raise complaints about the grading because they didn't get the final score they want—but have no real argument in support of a higher grade. This is not about legitimate requests to reconsider because of a mistake but instead students searching for any reason why they deserve the X points they need to get a better grade. It’s exemplified by the kind of argument that begins “I know it’s wrong but . . . .”
I do not have the power to change the grading structure—that is imposed from higher up.
Are there any satisfactory methods of discouraging such behavior? I don't want to stop people with legitimate issues from asking for regrades (mistakes happen!), but I would like to avoid having to deal with the student who tries every which way to get the few points they need to move up a level.

In The Four-Hour Work Week the author specifically encourages this kind of grubbing. As educators, we should teach students that this kind of inappropriate behavior can have negative consequences (as it does in industry).

@emory: The issue is trying to reduce the problem. Obviously I can't stop it if someone is determined, but I would like to make sure that it's not a desirable alternative.

I am just a student, but what many of my teachers have done is to say that at the end of the semester, there would be a couple of extra assignments that can be worth up to 3%(or enough to bump you up a grade).  This way you focus their energy in a positive learning way

I prefer to call such grading systems "stratified" rather than "strict". I can be a strict marker but still grade on a smooth scale (out of 100 rather than 4).

It's "strict" in the sense that the only free parameters are the minimum passing score and the "delta" between different grade levels. Once those are selected, the rest of the regime is fixed.

@earthling I'm curious. Can you explain 4HWW's position?

@SimonKuang In that book, he recommended that students consume 2 hours of the teacher's time (with question after question) every time the grade was lower than expected. The intent was to 'let the teacher know that there would be a price to pay for giving a low grade.' Of course, as a teacher, I would not tolerate this behavior.

@aeismail I think I am one of those grade grubbers you might be referring to; feel free to have a look at my question for a different perspective on the topic http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24017/is-it-always-worth-the-time-and-effort-to-challenge-the-mistakes-of-a-teacher

@Klik: That's not grade grubbing, since there's a problem with the actual question.

I really dislike the tone of the question. Your students are responding to the incentive system you created. That may frustrate you but it doesn't make sense to be upset with them.

Actually, I don't have control over the "incentive system"; that is prescribed by the faculty. All I have control over is what I use as the passing mark and what is the differential between grade levels. Moreover, I have no problem with students asking for regrades based on the merits. A "grade grubber" is someone who comes to me saying: "I should get points on this question even though I did it wrong because X."

If the tutors exams are set by someone else and split up into say 8 questions that are marked by persons unknown then it is completely impartial. Candidate numbers make it even better.In the olde days before internal assesment and degrees for dumb people you could go for a recount but it could backfire so you would not do this if you passed because before grade inflation a c pass was actually worth something.

A simple statement of "If you want to earn a better grade, master the material." should suffice.  Mark what is correct correct, and what is wrong wrong.  If they truly believe they deserve a better grade, and their grade was wrong they can always elevate the complaint somewhere higher up the chain of command.

@Praxeolitic: Your criticism of the question seems a bit unfair to me.  You say that the students are responding to the incentive system he has created, but in fact (1) some of the constraints in that system are not set by him; and (2) he is explicitly asking in his question for "any satisfactory methods of discouraging such behavior" (i.e., any change he could make to his incentive system).  So you are essentially criticising the question for being asked at all.

@Ben (1) Sure, but many are set by him. (2) The question wording presumes the problem is disingenuous students. I'd have been fine with the question "How can I reduce requests for re-grades?". The question has improved since I first commented, but as asked, it still makes assumptions that pre-maturely narrow the possible answers. There are no details about why students believe there's room for negotiation since OP has assumed they're just dishonestly badgering him. For all we know, OP's tests are a few open answer questions with no indicated point values and this is an XY problem.

@Ben (1) Sure, but many are set by him. (2) The question wording presumes the problem is disingenuous students. I'd have been fine with the question "How can I reduce requests for re-grades?". The question has improved since I first commented, but as asked, it still makes assumptions that pre-maturely narrow the possible answers. There are no details about why students believe there's room for negotiation since OP has assumed they're just dishonestly badgering him. For all we know, OP's tests are a few open answer questions with no indicated point values and this is an XY problem.

@Praxeolitic: I would say that the question doesn't presume that the problem is disingenuous students; instead it confines its scope to cases where there is no real argument in support of a higher grade.  Most academics have experience of this kind of thing occurring, so it is a reasonable thing to ask about.

@Praxeolitic This is in STEM for a problem driven final. And I know that the request is disingenuous because the students involved can specify precisely the number of points they want back but can’t come up with a single valid reason why they deserve it even after they’ve seen the solution. It’s a real phenomenon that is a separate subclass of the requests and others have recognized this.

I usually say that my rule for regrades is like the NFL's rule for replay challenges: there must be "indisputable visual evidence" that the original grade was incorrect.  For instance, scores were added incorrectly, or a correct answer was marked wrong.
If the score was a "judgment call" (for example, I deducted two points for some error and the student thinks it only deserved one point deducted), I won't change the grade, unless I did something really egregious.
I've seen the policy "We regrade the entire assignment and your grade could go up or down" but it makes me a little uncomfortable.  It suggests an element of randomness or caprice in the grading, which I don't want to promote, especially for younger or weaker students who may already feel like their grade is random.  I don't think students should feel like they have to roll the dice to get a genuine error corrected.

This is more or less the standard I use. However, when I regrade a question, it's the entirety of the issue for which the request was made, not just the specific item. Questions not asked about don't get touched.

It suggests an element of randomness or caprice in the grading +1, agreed.

It suggests an element of randomness or caprice in the grading — But there is an element of randomness in grading, just as there is in football refereeing.

There definitely is randomness. That's why you might sometimes make an error, right? If it wasn't random then you'd make the same mistake when regrading, so their grade wouldn't change...

I don't use the “We'll regrade everything if we regrade anything policy” because it suggests an element of vindictiveness.  If the grading process is already presented as a conflict, students may feel a policy like this will give me the option to deduct points elsewhere in order to balance out any points they have “won” from the appeal.

'"indisputable visual evidence" that the original grade was incorrect' - maybe the OP's situation is different, but I think that in many instances of "grade grubbing", the particular issue is that it is simply not clear whether the answer, and thus the original grade, is "correct" or "incorrect". All people involved in checking the answers may individually come to the conclusion that they do not see enough correct statements in the answer to evaluate it as correct, yet the "grade grubber" student keeps insisting the underlying thoughts were correct, and thus they deserve the point.

@O.R.Mapper My standard reply to such students: Your task is to provide an answer that is not only correct, but clearly correct. If I cannot determine whether your solution is correct after reasonable good-faith effort, its actual correctness is irrelevant.

@JeffE: I'd combine this with some emphasis on how all answer checking people independently found the answer to be not clear enough, but combined with that piece of information, the reply you suggested sounds worth a try on the next such occasion.

@O.R.Mapper: In very many cases, "all answer checking people" is a set of size one, in which case emphasizing "independently" is vacuous.  (In particular, note JeffE's use of the singular pronoun "I".  I know there are some systems where grading by committee is the norm, but there are other systems where it is not.)

@NateEldredge: Sure, I was speaking with this background in mind. If there is only one person primarily grading, I would involve some more people in this kind of cases in order to counter the likely accusations by the student that it's just my own arbitrary decision.

@JeffE I usually tell my students that their task is not only to provide a correct answer, but to demonstrate that they know how to get a correct answer. So not only should it be clearly correct, it should also be clear that they understand why it is correct.

@NateEldredge "I" doesn't mean I'm the only person involved in grading—I almost never am—but rather that as the instrctor, I am the final arbiter of grades. The rest of the course staff are acting as my proxies when they grade anything.

@JeffE The student may have an alternative approach that is equally valid and you just don't understand it. Or their approach may be easier to understand and just be longer on paper or look complex. Another problem is the limited sometimes arbitrary format. Sometimes a person doesn't feel incentivised or potentially punished for providing info that would make the answer easy to read. You effectively punish everyone thinking in another way.

@HopefullyHelpful I don't require students to solve problems in a particular way; every problem has multiple correct solutions, some of which I haven't seen before, all of which are worth full credit.  But it's the student's responsibility to explain their approach so that I understand it, and so that I can be sure they understand it. If they don't feel incentivized to make their answer easy to read, then they don't get full credit, not because they think differently, but because their answer isn't easy to read.

@HopefullyHelpful If the approach is correct and properly explained, then the person grading the exam will be able to understand it. The graders are not some random people off the street but will have significant experience with the subject.

The students have a right to protest to the department if they feel they've been graded unfairly, and I tell them that.  Never once had a grade overturned.  This is of course predicated by a clear explanation of what's expected so I also don't get too many complaints.

or younger or weaker students who may already feel like their grade is random funny! and i agree

I've had professors say it'll "cost" a point or two to challenge the grading on anything, to try to discourage asking for tiny or unlikely corrections.  I don't know that it's particularly effective, though - I never asked them for changes.

Another thing the NFL is give each team a limited number of challenges, with teams getting more if the previous ones are upheld.

"regrade whole thing, grades could go up or down" is to prevent cherry-picking small mistakes in your favor ("I got a -2, but my friend only got a -1 for the same thing", "sure, but your friend got -2 on question six. You made the same mistake but we missed it".) But if a student came in with a real issue, we'd handle just that one thing.

I never had issues like that but I've heard the following solution by a colleague: The students inspect their works in the presence of the professor of TA. If they have any complaints they have to write them down and hand them in. There is never any discussion going on, but only written complaints are accepted. All written complaints are treated carefully and there may be a next date for inspection and even a next round but this can only consider things which have been addressed in the first round. I.e. you can't "grub for a point in exercise 1" in the first round and then try to "grub for another point in exercise 2" in the second round. All complaints have to be submitted in the first round.
What I've heard is, that this dramatically reduces grade grubbing and especially makes "grade grubbers" think hard about their mistakes (which can be considered as a good side effect). As a matter of fact, it's much harder to articulate why you think that you deserve another point for some exercise if there is no clear "misgrading" if you have to do this in written form.
Edit some years later: Now I have some personal experience with this system. I did this at least six times and it works awesome. Where I am we have an official "grade grubbing date" called "Klausureinsicht" i.e. there is one date at which all students can have a look at their exams. I usually have 10 students in one room who can have a look at their exams at the same time. I answer all questions related to the content of the exam, but as soon as the grading is in question I hand out a paper and a pen and ask the student to write down their complaint. I even encourage writing complaints down. It further helps to cut off the discussion if I add that "I can't answer questions on the grading as I would have to look up how our general grading for this kind of solution/error is" (I actually have one but do not bring it to the Klausureinsicht). I collect all replies, keep them with the exams, check them and reply to the students via email on the spot or the next day. Answering the complaints is usually pretty easy. Most of the time I just write "The grading/deduction of points corresponds to our grading system." or "What you have written down does not show what you are complaining about/what you may intended to write and we can only grade what you have written." Only one time (out of several dozens) I had a student trying to continue grubbing.
Also, the fact that you can not change the grading system at your place is a big plus in my eyes, at least when it comes to grade grubbing. (One the other hand, you have to be more careful and work harder when producing the exam so that you can be pretty sure that the difficulty of the exam is ok.)

Are the responses for the regarding also written down?

I am not sure, but I think this is a good idea.

Just happened to see this discussion today (Nov '13). Requiring written (not email, not text-msg, not Facebook, not...) explanation/query of why the grade should be changed is an outstanding notion, if only because it changes the cost/benefit analysis (conscious or not) for students, and substantially deters grade changes for dubious reasons, exactly because students hate writing in complete sentences, being precise, etc. I wish I'd thought of requiring written communiques... :)

Useful answer. Also, what's the literal English translation of "Klausureinsicht"? Google translate isn't being helpful in this case.

Klausur translates to exam and Einsicht is inspection as in "inspection of files", so a literal translation would be "inspection of exams".

I have three primary methods for dealing with this behavior:

On the first day of class, I mention that I won't tolerate grade-grubbing.  I say that I am firm and will treat everyone equally.  What I don't say is that students are much more likely to see leniency if they showed a good effort in class, and are nice about asking me to review a grade.
I admit that I make grading mistakes (and so do the TAs), and we'll fix the problem if they occur.
I have a policy that if you ask for a re-grade, I'll look at the whole assignment and if the end grade is actually lower, that's what you'll get (I don't think I've ever lowered a grade this way).

I would like to avoid having to deal with the student who tries every which way to get the few points they need to move up a level.

You'll always have to deal with a couple.  If you set the ground rules on the first day, you'll see fewer on average.

(I don't think I've ever lowered a grade this way) — I have.  I also ask for all regrade requests in writing, and I announce at the start of class that I never change grades (except for arithmetic errors) while the student is standing in front of me.

@JeffE "...while the student is standing in front of me" -- good advice!

I also make it a point to announce that I don't hold court in class.  The point there is that if the student makes a compelling argument for a response I don't want other students to bandwagon on it in an attempt for "free points"

In addition to #3, and JeffE's requirement that I will only handle regrade requests in writing (read: not by email), I also put a statute of limitations: I will only entertain regrade requests for one week after I return the assignment.

@BenNorris this punishes everyone with a tight shedule or other deadlines or stuff to learn for.

@HopefullyHelpful Expecting responses to regrade requests long after the work is returned punishes instructors, who also have tight schedules and multiple competing demands for their time. If your schedule is too tight to keep up with the class, you're trying to do too much. Drop something

You're effectively trying to deter or scare students away from appealing the grading of their work. Don't label them "grade grubbers", and don't insinuate you might make an effort to reduce their grade on other questions if they appeal.

@JohnB: But it's the exact opposite! If a student makes a compelling argument about an answer which you marked as wrong, convincing you to accept it, then all students must bandwagon on it, i.e. if anybody else gave the same answer they should also have their grade increased.

See these resources:
https://brownmath.com/stfa/raise.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20130705093554/http://www.rochester.edu/College/phl/gradechange.pdf
I posted the latter form on my door, and referred students to it when they came grumbling. They were furious the first couple of times, but then learned that it was a moot point to argue with me. (Although there was a case when I screwed up the final grade computation, and had to submit a few dozen grade change slips).
On a more serious side, I stopped doing the 60-70-80-90-100 cutoffs in the latest courses at all. Think about this: you are spending 70% of the test material and volume to test for a C, and then another 10% for a B, and then another 10% for an A. A much better use of your test problems is to have 1/3 of the problems address the grade of C, then another 1/3 of more complex problems to address the grade of B, and finally the most difficult 1/3 of problems address the grade of A. So in my exams, I would state something like:

There are 12 problems on this test marked at level C; you need to get 10 of them right to get the grade of C. There are 10 problems on this test marked at level B; you need to get at least 8 problems at level B or higher, and at least 15 problems total, to get the grade of B. There are 8 problems on this test marked at level A; you need to get at least 6 problems at level A, and at least 20 problems overall, to get a grade of A.

That is, out of 12+10+8 = 30 problems, you need to do two thirds, pick and choose, to get a full A, and only a third to get a C. You got 4 A problems, 4 B problems, and 8 C problems? That's a B+ in my books; you are a far shot for the required 20 problems for A, but you fulfilled the B requirements, and slightly exceeded them by having completed a bunch of A problems. The problems would be clustered, on most occasions: a given "big" problem would start with two-three C points, progress to one or two B points, and then culminate in an A point. Some A problems would be stand alone ones. So there would be 8 to 10 "big" problems and items within it. The smartest students would work on 6 problems, get everything right, and leave early. Not so bright students would attempt everything and fail at everything, and walk away with a C. I've seen all of the different ways that students approached it, which showed their learning styles and testing strategies -- pretty interesting per se.
While initially confusing (I train students to it by giving like three quizzes based on this system in the first three weeks), this system works very well in the end. Before each test, I also give students rubrics stating what they need to know at C/B/A level (C level: know the formula; B: determine which formula to use in a given simple context; A level: know where the formula breaks down, and how), so there was very little arguing about grades: either you've done the problem to my liking, or you haven't; and then you just count the completes up.

What was the duration of these tests, in which students seeking an A had to solve at least 20 problems?

I did it in both Tue-Thu 75 minute blocks, and Mon-Wed-Fri 50 minutes blocks. The tests would vary in length appropriately, of course. A short 10 minute quiz would be just one "big" problem (see update above, in the end of the -2nd paragraph), with two C items, one B item, and one A item.

@StasK that grade change request form it's just so entertaining

There are some good answers here, especially Nate's, which most closely matches my own grading policies.  One item that I want to highlight that hasn't been included in other answers is the time factor.  You must put a strict time limit on regrade requests.  My course policies are that I will accept regrade requests up to one week after the exam/homework/lab/etc was handed back to the students.
The main reason for the time limit is to keep a student from grubbing too much at the end of the semester.  When someone discovers that they have a B in the class, they often try hard to find a few extra points in the hopes of getting over that cutoff into A-grade land.  I want to put most of the graded events of the semester out of bounds for such searches.  If those 2 points weren't important enough for a student to request the regrade back in September, then they aren't important enough in December, now that final grades are being calculated.

I have small enough classes that I can hand out exams during class and give the students time to look at them. I tell students that if they have any regrading requests they must leave the exam paper with me when they leave that day - once it leaves the room the grade is final. This also avoids certain kinds of cheating where students change their answers and then ask for regrading. But it does give the students a fair chance to make sure I have added up their points correctly, etc.

I would add that this kind of policy can actually make the grade-grubbing process constructive.   If the student goes over their exam a few days afterwards and examines carefully where each answer was marked incorrect, they might learn something about the problem or concept tested.

-1 for referring to grade appeals as grade-grubbing. It's bad enough OP does that. Other than that, an appeal deadline is certainly justifiable. However, remember that the students might be in the middle of their exam period and it is more difficult to go over previous exams when you're studying for the next one.

I know a prof who solved the problem by giving a free point to all the people who are just one point below the next grade. That way there are no students whose grade is on the boundary (e.g. nobody has 89%), so it is more difficult to get sufficient additional points for the grade above via grubbing. In effect this means the grading criterion is lowered, but since this depends on other factors as well (say, how difficult the test is), it hasn't led to administrative problems. The students are also happy with this sort of arrangement.
It also depends on how you give points. If you stick to multiple choice questions on a test, it's much harder to bargain for points.

"If you stick to multiple choice questions on a test, it's much harder to bargain for points": You are also likely to have a very bad test that doesn't do a good job of testing if students know how to apply material. I also don't like the idea of adding the "free" point, because it leads to arbitrary grading. Students shouldn't get the point just because they are on the border.

So what about people with 88%? Won't they grub to be able to land at 89% and therefore 90%? Or would people where grading mistakes happened not get the free point? This seems like a bad idea to me.

@aeismail - funny, I've often heard that of multiple choice tests (also that thay are easy), but my impression (from some training in test-making) is that it's in fact just  hard to make a good one. In other words, it requires not  just knowledge on the subject matter, but also knowledge on test making. It also requires more questions, so many people think it's not worth the effort. But I've seen some very good ones as well, in the sense that they are nontrivial and manage to distinguish between different levels of knowledge of the students.

@thejh - "So what about people with 88%? Won't they grub to be able to land at 89% and therefore 90%?" Well, logically yes, but psychologically/factually, no, they didn't feel entitled to do that.

@aeismail if the grading is at all subjective then there will be variance between multiple gradings.  If the initial grade is near a cutoff point, then the final score will be arbitrary.  Ideally the grader should keep on regrading until, he or she can confidently and non-arbitrarily place the student in one final score category or another.  In practice the free point is less work and is popular with students.

@thejh: I've done something similar to this for a long time; it's worked well for me. I don't formally tell people that "if you get an 89, I'll pretend it's a 90," but I do publish a grading scale that's higher than I intend to carry out. So, if I expect my "A line" to be at 90, I'll say you need a 92 to be guaranteed an A, but that "I reserve the right to curve that scale." I've used that system for 7 years and have never had a grubber.

@aeismail: There is a lot of arbitrariness about grading, for many reasons which I won't go into. I believe it's not a bad thing to acknowledge that fact, if only marginally.

Instead of discouraging grade grubbing the traditional way (by making it harder), you could also choose to discourage it by making it less necessary. Students are much less likely to fight you over a few points if one or both of the following are true.

Have so many course points available that it would take an an entire
assignment's worth of grade grubbing to move up a letter grade in
the course. For example, if there are 1,000 points, and each exam is
100 points, then it would take on average about 10 exam points to
increase your overall grade by 1%. To move up from a course grade of
87% to 90%, the student would need to find 30 points, equivalent to
increase from a 70% to a 100% on an exam. All but the most ardent
grade grubber will have trouble finding that many.
Drop the lowest assignment(s) in certain (or all) categories. If you drop one out of 5 exams, two out of 10 quizzes, 5 out of 25 homework assignments, and so on, grade grubbers are less likely to come and try to make a deal over one low grade. They will focus more on doing better on a later assignment so that they can drop the bad assignment.

Each of these options lowers the marginal benefit of each additional point on an exam or assignment. At a point where the effort outweighs the benefit, most students will stop grubbing and only come complain when it is serious.

Alternatively, all of your assignments could be multiple choice with one correct answer and no partial credit.

Sadly, this is not an available option here. In Germany, homework is not allowed to count toward a final grade, and multiple exams are allowed only under exceptional conditions. (Yes, it's a flawed system.)

All but the most ardent grade grubber will have trouble finding that many. — Alas, the most ardent grade grubber seems to take my class every semester.

"Instead of discouraging grade grubbing the traditional way (by making it harder), you could also choose to discourage it by making it less necessary." +1 just for this. Making something more desirable and less accessible just encourages people to push harder for it rather than going the alternative, more "honest" route.

@aeismail There are universities in Germany that allow and actually do this. It depends on your Prüfungsordnung.

Disagree with item 1, because if there are many misgrading issues - and that's more likely to be frequent when there are lots of assignments and questions - this approach essentially "drowns" students in them. I like item 2, though.

I think the best approach to these types of situations is honesty.  I would never refuse a request to explain why how I arrived at a student's grade but if I feel that a student is going about the process in a non-constructive way then I tell them.
If the student's approach appears unprofessional to me then it likely does to others, so this is an opportunity for professional development.  Focusing on the positive I would explain how education is about much more than grades and in addition to the other good reasons to strive to become an educated person, an over emphasis on grades damages their image to the faculty who will have to provide references etc...

@JoeZ. I am not sure I totally follow your comment but the point of my answer is that you are always being evaluated subjectively on your merits.  If you act unprofessionally (i.e., grade grub) then you will be evaluated poorly in the eyes of the faculty.  Most faculty that I know are much more impressed by serious students who clearly want to learn than they are by a high GPA.  Furthermore, good professional habits (i.e., not whining about anything) will be far more valuable in the future than just a high GPA, so any opportunity to help students develop those habits should not be wasted.

Wait, no, I misread your answer. I thought you were talking about the teacher acting unprofessional, not the student.

@JoeZ. Ha! well that would change things...  I edited the answer to clarify who I was talking about.

I deleted my original comment because it seemed fussy and immature, given the actual context of the answer. Your point in general is a good one; however, in order for your lesson to truly sink in, you need to convince them that grades don't matter much, as many university students are immigrants who come from backgrounds where such stratified grading determines their life's path (e.g. the Gaokao) and they believe that the professors tell them the non-importance of grades just to feel better, and "know" not to believe them. In my experience, it's those people who grub about marks the most.

In my case, I actually experienced the opposite phenomenon in my most recent semester. A class on logic gave me a very high grade that I really felt I didn't deserve, given how much I'd actually learned from the class (not a lot). However, given that the class was rather badly taught in the first place, I decided not to push the issue.

I consider all requests for re-marking. As said many times here, mistakes do happen and I'm only human. However, when I find a student who is being unreasonable, I tend to be even stricter in my interpretations than I was the first time around.
Of course, the difference between 85% and 86% is not normally significant (either in the quality of the work or the overall impact on a student's total grade for the module) but for those who think they can push for a 1% 'bump up' in grade may well find themselves with a 1%-2% 'bump down' (85% to 84%).
Teacher reputations spread quite quickly between students and I believe the students will act more appropriately once they realize they are not in a 'no lose' situation.

In a strict grading system the difference between 85% and 86% can be significant on a student's total grade for the module, but the difference between 85% and 84% may be insignificant.  So the student may well be in a "no lose" situation.

@emory It's a good point. Although the 'adjustment' could be more than 1-2%.

I had a clever teacher in high school who responded to grade grubbing (with respect to a particular exam or assignment) in an effective way. He presented the student with a wager:

"I will be glad to mark that exam over again. However, you may end up with a lower grade. I will mark the entire exam, very carefully and strictly. You do not get to cherry pick which answers are reconsidered. Therefore, you may lose marks in places where I had been generous which may more than offset any gains. It is like a bet! Do you want to take the bet and have me check the exam?"

I don't know whether the students always declined the wager, but they did in every instance that I witnessed. Those students were not in fact confident that they deserved more marks, only that they deserved more marks in some particular question or area. More importantly, they knew very well that, overall, the teacher marked fairly, with a slant toward generosity.

-1 for vindictive deterrence. The students would likely decline the wager since they believe (probably justifiably) that you will be motivated to penalize them for appealing by finding reasons to decrease their grade.

@einpoklum That teacher was one of the nicest I ever had; there was nothing vindictive about it.

Then he was an exception to the rule. I was judging merely by what you quoted - and I know of professors who are notoriously mean and use this kind of text as pure deterrent.

I am now 38yrs old and came across this site doing research for a graduate program. During high school I was not a "good" student. My grades were as bad as you could imagine and I paid strict attention to the grading methods that each teacher used. I did as little home-work as I could. Often home-work counted heavily in grading so I would need to max tests and especially semester finals (finals were usually 20% weighted in final averages). My typical finals week would require me to achieve 6-7 high "A" grades to achieve a D and pass the courses. My GPA at graduation was 1.82, I loved to listen to lectures and to read texts but I never wanted to do the mundane work of reinforcement. When I went to college I found a grading style that I was very comfortable with namely tests, essays, exams I finished my B.S. with a 3.83 GPA and did it in five semesters. Very little about my approach changed from high school to college except that I more than doubled my course load.
I had one high-school teacher that gave us a choice about how we would be graded. He was a geometry teacher and he gave you the choice of Option A: 100% based on tests or Option B: 50% tests, 30% homework, 20% quizzes. You had to choose on the first day of class and sign a contract. I chose test option, and felt a vested interest making my choice the right one for me. He had one extra credit question on every test that was related to the topic but much more difficult I finished his class with 104% grade and likely the lone A of my high school career. I never did any home work but I hung on his every word in class and spent time while I was running working through geometric proofs in my head. I would have likely done that anyway but he is still an inspiration to me now and he is among the influences that have lead me to want to teach after I retire.
If a kid can present a compelling logical and supportable premise that supports regarding you should thank them for helping to improve your curriculum or your communication process; find a way to benefit from their observations. It may be an opportunity to apply some constructivist principles or you might have to expose them to a harsh truth that they are wrong.

If

you have a strict grading policy; and
90%+ = A, 85% = A-, 80% = B+.

Then let epsilon be a margin of error such that you would be surprised if a regrade changed things by more than epsilon points.  For this example, let epsilon be 1 point.
Now apply this algorithm
while (cutpoint-grade<epsilon)
    regrade

Perhaps your initial grading will generate grades like
84.99
Then after applying the algorithm it might change to
85.01; or 83.99
From the grade grubbers point of view:

84.99:  asking for a regrade is a no-brainer.  If the regrade results in just a slight improvement, the grubber moves from B+ to A-.  Even if the regrade results in a lower grade, the grubber will still most likely receive a B+.
85.01:  not asking for a regrade is a no-brainer.  It is unlikely the regrade will result in the 5 additional points necessary to move from A- to A, but there is a good chance the regrade will move the student to a B+.
83.99:  not a no-brainer, but hopefully inertia will lead the grubber to inaction.  Regrading will change the grade to somewhere in 82.99 - 84.99, -- solid B+ territory.

That algorithm causes an infinite loop if cutpoint-grade<epsilon is actually correct!  How did you manage to escape this infinite loop to write this answer?  ;)

@Ben grade is a random variable.  cutpoint is a constant.  epsilon is chosen by you.  If you choose a reasonable epsilon value then the algorithm will terminate early with an upgrade for the student.  Or if you are smart, you will bypass the algorithm and just upgrade.

I would hope that when you have re-grade a student paper you would settle on the grade you think is correct, and thus grade would no longer vary after each subsequent re-grading.

@Ben If after reading a student's essay you strongly believe that 89.999 and 90.001 are both appropriate grades but 89.99 is way too low and 90.01 is way too high then choose 0.001 as epsilon.  Then after your first reading you decide 89.9995 is a good grade, then upgrade them to 90 b/c life is too short for meaningless distinctions.  But if your first reading leads to 89.94 then don't upgrade them b/c you have apparently decided that there is a meaningful distinction.

When I was doing my bachelor degree, my department had a policy which made students more serious about asking for re-marking: when a student submit a formal request, he has to pay a small fee which will be refunded if his grade changes after being re-marked, otherwise the department will keep that money. Although I doubt that this solution can be applied everywhere, but it actually makes students to think carefully instead of blindly asking for re-mark all the time.

That policy creates a financial incentive to deny appeals on grades. -1 in my book.

One class I took had a policy where if you submitted a regrade request, and it was denied, they took five points off your grade.  They only did this for people who had already gotten at least one regrade request denied, so that students who had legitimate basis for regrades weren't discouraged.

That's horrible and unfair.

So, like in the NFL, where in a coach tosses a challenge flag, and it turns out there is no evidence to backup the claim, the team is charged one time out.   I approve.

TL;DR: Don't assume they're "grade-grubbers"; treat them fairly and respectfully, and consider their appeals on the merits.
You're pre-judging them - assuming that their appeals are invalid because they "didn't get the final score they want". Maybe what they want is the grade they deserve, based on their answers? Or maybe even it's the grade they deserve based on their command of the subject material, which may be poorly reflected in the grades? You've dismissed this possibility from the get-go, and en masse.
You've even adopted a derogatory nickname for them. Ha ha, very droll... not. Don't use it.
Have an orderly procedure for submitting and handling appeals (perhaps insist on appeals in writing with a guideline document for writing appeals). Don't try to penalize people or threaten penalties or negative repercussions when submitting appeals. Consider the appeals on the merits when you get them - whether it's an appeal about 10% of the grade or 1% of the grade. You do not have to be lenient in grading - but you need to be fair, consistent, and willingly consider the appellants' arguments.
Finally, if you get a lot of appeals, that's usually a sign there's something wrong either with the grading in general, or with the teaching-staff-students interaction, or with the choice of grading scheme, or all of the above.

I think you misread the question.  This was not about how to deal with perceived "grade grubbers"; but how to discourage the behavior.  The policy would exist to make grade-grubbing more difficult or not worth it.  It does not imply that people who have concerns about their marking are grade-grubbing.  It asks the question of how people acting with the intent to grade-grub can be stopped.

@JMac: Oh, I read the question just fine. OP, and you, take for granted that what you're trying to stop is "real" grade-grubbing. And I'm telling you: It isn't; or at the very least, you should assume it isn't and treat it accordingly.

There are several answers here which address students who are looking for legitimate feedback vs. grade grubbers.  I'm really not sure why you're assuming otherwise.  Most of the top answers are focusing on trying to establish a clear system which ensures fairness for all students.  The idea behind the practice being not to discourage grade grubbing, but to make a system where some students can't take advantage, and the professors time is not wasted.

@JMac: The fact that it's not clear to you why I assume otherwise, is a problem. Your perception of student appeals as undue "advantage taking" that Professors are "wasting time" on - is a problem. In my opinion. I'll say it again: It's not grade-grubbing; students are taking advantage of what they should be able to take advantage of, i.e. the right to appeal if they believe they were misgraded; and professors' time is not wasted in handling these appeals, it is just used.

The number of appeals is also a function of the pressure a student faces. A lot of appeals can also happen if you are teaching students who face strict GPA requirements or who want to apply to things that may care about their grades. I have had students I called in for cheating take the opportunity to ask for a higher grade because of external circumstances (graduate school hopes, sick relatives whom they want to impress, etc.), separate entirely from what they have done in the class. Some students cite the idea that "it never hurts to ask," but some requests waste time with no learning gain.

@cactus_pardner: From personal experience, I have not found this to be the case. Or at least - not if an appeal needs to be made formally and specifically in writing. This discourages appeals to pity rather than to reason. Note that this way it does hurt to ask, in that one needs to invest the effort of wording the appeal, which is not trivial.

My experience is from a senior high school perspective.  In the English department, it was usually essays or essay-format questions on tests that students wanted remarks because they thought they deserved a higher mark.  If a student approached with this sort of request, and I as a teacher felt they were just fishing for extra marks, we would make a clean copy of the assignment, so that my comments/corrections/marks were not on the paper, and pass the paper over to the department head for re-marking, with the warning that his decision would be final and would replace the mark I had assigned--no matter if it was higher or lower.  Of course our department head had the reputation of being the toughest marker in the department, and his re-marking often (but not inevitably) resulted in lower marks.  Once the news got around that this was the way re-mark requests were being handled, the number of students who were just whining in case they could coax a few extra marks out of the teacher, dropped.  They didn't want to take the chance that a re-mark would leave them worse off than before.  The students who had a legitimate complaint still had a way to have it addressed, and of course addition errors were handled on the spot with no attempt made to discourage them.


text:
Advice on applying for Economics graduate programs with a low GRE
I took the GRE in August and scored a 301 and took it recently again and scored a 308. My field of work is primarily in Behavioural Economics so I plan on applying to specialized and general Economics grad school programs. I have a strong profile with internships in various organizations within my field and outside it as well as several publications and a good CGPA.
My questions are:

What are my chances of getting into good/top grad school programs in the U.S/UK?
Should I consider applying to places outside of the US that don't require the score at all?

Thanks in advance!

UK no problem, as the GRE doesn't exist here.

Actually, LSE, Cambridge, Oxford require it unfortunately.

Your math score matters much more than your verbal in these programs. Might be helpful to specify if the weakness extends to your math score.

It does. 143 Q the first time, 153 the next.

143 to 153 is like a jump from 20th to 60th percentile. It's not brilliant but I believe it's not so low that your application in the US will get automatically screened out. A killing GPA or great grades in related courses will help as well.

I think this is a duplicate question. Yes, this is a weak score, particularly for a Economics.  In general, if you are weak in one area, you need to find programs that care less about this. In addition to finding strong programs not requiring GrE, you can simply apply to a larger number of programs in the hope that you will “hit” on one that likes your particular packet.

The only way to know is to apply to one or more programs. If your record isn't strong in some area you may need to apply to several different programs.
But for most institutions, no single number is likely to be an absolute block. You need to make your case. Why is it that you are a good candidate? Why are low scores not reflective of your ability? What can you add to a program you are part of? Some places may block you, but for those that don't, be ready to make your case through your other materials and especially in an interview. Showcase the positive.
I wouldn't take drastic action until I explored the terrain a bit, however.

Thanks for your answer, Buffy. Close to 95% of the places I'm applying to don't have an interview round and in the process of hedging for possible low scores on the test, I managed to find a lot of places that don't require the score at all and are still pretty good. I was just disheartened by the consecutive low scoring despite my hardwork towards the test and was wondering if my chances at a gold standard program are out of reach.

Hopefully you will be evaluated by people who realize that testing isn't everything and doesn't actually tell you much about some subset of the population. But, like anyone else, the case is yours to make.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Can I use the same PhD application for consecutive years without paying extra fees?
I am applying this year for a PhD program in US schools.
My chances to get accepted will be higher next year, but I don't want to miss the chance of getting accepted this year. should I wait for the next year, or should I apply this year and ask the university to reconsider my application for next year? The problem is with the application fees, it would be very hard to apply for 2 years, the application will cost me around $200 (including the scores of GRE, GRE Physics and TOEFL), and I am intending to apply for 10 universities.

You could ask for a fee waiver for the applications if you have financial difficulties. If you apply once this year and that application is rejected, and if you want to submit a new application next year, I think that you will have to pay the application fee twice (unless you get a waiver) as you are effectively submitting two different applications.

Don't forget to apply to Europe, it is free!

Thanks alot. I will consider europe in my applications, but i didn't want to take master's befire PhD.

This is tricky, because in the US there really is no standard/universal handling for this sort of situation. It's probably going to be different at every department you are thinking of applying to.
With that said, there are a few common outcomes, to wit:

Some programs will simply say no - you must pay in full at the time of both the original application, and re-application.
Some programs offer fee waivers with a variety of requirements. Some programs will waive fee for US citizens with demonstrated need, some programs waive fees for people who participated in certain programs (often which target helping certain groups get to and succeed in college).
Some offer waivers/reductions to countries where the relatively reasonable fee to US citizens is just an absurd expense (especially ones where $75 is 2-4+ weeks of average salary). This does not apply to every country, however.
I suppose it's technically possible that a program will allow you to pay the fee once and reapply the next year at no additional cost...but I've really never heard of that and I'd be pleasantly surprised if any program you were looking at would offer you that option.

I'd suggest you contact a few of your target programs right away and ask their graduate coordinator what your options specific to the fees are. That's really the only way I can think of to get a real answer that's certain enough to help you decide on what to do.
But barring answers from your target programs, I would absolutely suggest that you do not simply rely on them being willing to let you reapply at no extra cost or automatically not pay the fee - or even to waive the fee more than once. They are not required to do this by any external rules or laws, and being a foreign citizen or having limited finances are not protected/privileged groups under most US laws.
Get direct answers from schools you care about, and then decide for yourself if you absolutely cannot afford to apply two years in a row if it comes to that.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Why would new teachers' grade distribution consist of more As and Fs than more experienced teachers'?
Three students  came to my office hours and told me that they are straight As but for some reason are failing my class. I have 14 students who got A- and A. 11 are in 80s range, 9 got 70-77, and 9 in 50-60% range (three of those didn't turn in assignments). Is this a normal grade distribution or are some failing because I am doing something wrong? I was told that the problem could be my mid-term exam (it wasn't well-designed!!!) or that I am a difficult grader.
I was also told that this grade distribution (lots of Fs!) are common for new teachers. In other words, new teachers have lots of As and lots of Fs. Honestly, I don't understand the logic behind that. How is that possible? Or why?

Your question is unclear to me. 1. You mixed percentage grade with letter grade. 2. Did those who didn't turn in assignments get F's?. Exactly who is got F's? Those below 50%?

They grade distribution itself does not seem unreasonable, but such thing might be hard to judge without knowing the content and grading method you have used.

If you are concerned about having too many A grades and too many F grades there is a really easy cure . Keep your standard test templates but add a few really hard questions and a few really easy questions .This will make an A as hard to get as an E .I know from experience that an A is just as hard to get as an E .

My first concern would be this: are the students really straight A students in other comparable classes, or did they just say that to emphasize their complaints?

Grade distribution is pretty unimportant compared to well-thought out standards for the course. Anecdote: Last spring I had two sections of the same class with identical schedule, lectures, etc. At the end one section had a 28% passing rate, and the other 60%. We must be humble that what the students bring to the table make much more difference than anything the instructor ever does.

tl;dr: seems like perfectly acceptable distribution.  Students will try anything to get a better grade, don't mind them too much.
To begin with, with N=43, especially if this is your first time teaching the class, you don't have a lot to go on.  As you teach it a few more times, you'll get a feel for your overall grade distribution.
I personally average somewhere around 20-25% A, 40-50% B, 20-25% C, and 5-15% D/F/W across all my classes.  But I've had some individual sections that were virtually all As and Bs, and I've had one where the D/F/W was a clear majority (!).  No one in the administration complained or questioned my grading/instructional skills in that last one because they were due to extreme absences and not handing in heavily-weighted assignments, and also because I had taught it before with more "normal" (= commonly occurring, not statistically normal) distributions.
As to new teachers having lots of As and Fs, if it fits an inverted bell curve, it's a sign that your class is probably a bit too easy, the As are people that get it, and the F are those that don't, but without more difficult questions, you have no way of discriminating any other levels.  But frankly, your distribution seems fine and unremarkable to me.
As the user autistic notes in the comments to your question, if you're concerned about too many As/Fs and not enough B/C/Ds, you may need to have questions or assignments that include both more difficult (to pull more Bs out of the As) and easier (to pull more C/Ds out of the Fs).
Your ultimate recourse (and resource) is if the course is something that has been taught before at your university by someone who is still there, ask them to look over how you're grading.  If it seems fine to them, then you just got a class that happens to have that grade distribution.  If not, then you may want to make some minor adjustments based on their recommendation.
What I wouldn't do is judge your grading with their other instructors.  Besides the fact that they could just be very lazy students in your class alone, each department within a university will have its own culture of expectations, workloads, and grade assigning.  Those students may have As, but in a department that doesn't demand much.  You may also have students that are surprised at getting an A, if they come from one that is far more demanding.

Thanks a lot for taking the time and responding! I really appreciate it!

Ask your students why they think they are failing to understand the material.
Is the course too hard? Are they unaccustomed to your lecturing style (and should you try to change it)? Are some of the students missing important pre-requisite knowledge that you are assuming the whole class has? Are the assignments very tangential to the lecture material?
We can only guess as to the reasons. Ask the students.

Thank you so much for responses!  The class is an introductory level course.  I have 4 short essay assignments, a mid-term, and a final exam. The mid-term wasn't easy! I had some difficult questions and some easy ones. I have also been grading for other professors for years and never had complaints! So I am really confused! I asked them if they understand my lectures and they said yes! So I am confused!

Bear in mind that grading for another teacher is a different experience than giving the lecture and grading assignments for your own class. (You were in the lecture and know you mentioned thought processes XYZ, and they only mentioned X in their exam.) It doesn't seem the grade distribution is entirely unreasonable. If you are a difficult grader emphasize the level of detail you expect in every example and in an introductory course be sure to explain concepts in more than one way if possible. Pause often in class to assess understanding. Remember, it may just be lack of effort on their part.

Thanks a lot! You are so right because when I was grading I could tell if someone understood the material or not because I knew exactly what I explained (or spent time on) in class!

It would raise some concern that 9 out of 43 students received F's  A more typical number, historically speaking, would be 5%-10%.  An example would be: Georgia State University in 1920; however, the question is why did they get F's
If you have a batch of students who did not turn in the work or demonstrate that they learned the material then the grades seem justified.
Try to look at other instructors tests that you can compare to yours and have peers look at your tests.

The typical percentage of failing depends on the place and subject. Where I did my undergrad, 40% F was rather common, and 70% not unheard of.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
How to handle multiple years lost to test preparation on CV?
In 2011, I passed the Master's degree in mathematics with more than 80 percentile. I had a dream of becoming a research scholar in one of country's reputable mathematical institutes.
However, here in India, PhD candidates have to pass a test called National Eligibility Test before facing the interview board of such institutes. To prepare for the test, I disconnected myself from the outer world. Unfortunately, I failed the first three times but managed to pass the test in my fourth attempt, and subsequently joined the institute of my dream for PhD in 2013.
Because I didn't do anything other than preparing for the test, I have a hard time filling the 2-year gap in my CV. Whenever I look at it, that 2-year void pains me as most of my fellow scholars can show an uninterrupted career path on their CVs. I do understand myself that my mathematical knowledge grew in that two years, still I can't find a single demonstrable item to support my case.
Most people either clear the national test in the first or second try, and most of the rest would choose to leave the field forever, or get involved in guest lectureship in some institutes while preparing for the test. For me, however, I found it hard to make the time for anything else on top of studying, and hence I did nothing else. Now, I really wish to have such examples in my CV.
My question: have you lost many years in order to prepare for tests or exams? If so, can you suggest some examples on how to explain that lost time?

If the time is between MA and PhD, I don't think that matters much. Many people take that time off, leave academia briefly, or work during the gap. What matters more is what you do once you get a PhD.

"PhD candidates have to pass a test called National Eligibility Test before facing the interview board of such institutes. " - this is not true for many "top "schools in India. You can apply and be admitted first and then qualify for NET later. You can also just get funding from the school.

I agree with @socialsciencedoc's comment, although I think that what s/he describes is a more common phenomenon in the social sciences than in STEM fields.  In the former, it's rare to be a 20-something PhD, and in the latter it most certainly isn't: not getting your PhD in math until you're 30 makes you (slightly, and certainly inessentially) older than average.
Anyway, I am not really scrutinizing gaps in candidates CVs until after their PhD (at which point I am!).  Having a gap between undergrad and grad is still very common in STEM fields: e.g. many people do a couple years of high school teaching before the siren song of academia lures them back.  One of my current PhD students did some high school teaching (among other things...) and will be over 30 when he gets his PhD.  In his case, he acquired some skills in his "gap years" that are proving useful to him as a student and future mathematician.
Spending multiple years only studying for an exam is not something that most Western academics would be so familiar with, I'm afraid.  I'm not sure how to spin that positively.  So I would just not explain the gap at all.  Put your energy into what you can now control: getting a PhD in a timely manner (in math, four or five years is ideal; six is still totally fine; after that it begins to look like you lack sufficient locomotion) and, of course, proving some great theorems in your thesis work.  My eye would probably slide right over this gap in your CV...and I think that is exactly the way you want it.
Added: I missed this sentence reading your question the first time: " I do understand myself that my mathematical knowledge grew in that two years, still I can't find a single demonstrable item to support my case."  That's great; truly.  So your time was actually well spent, and I'm very glad to hear that.  You don't have to further justify that that time was well spent: it got you into the great university that you now attend.  So I think you have little to worry about, actually.

Only out of curiosity, have you ever heard of anything similar to Spending multiple years only studying for an exam such as National Eligibility Test mentioned by the OP before? I am asking this because I am thinking of asking a question along this line. It's a fairly common thing in Asia.

@scaaahu: No, I haven't.  (Well, abstractly maybe.  But not with respect to a particular person.)  But I can't help but notice that I have advised the OP not to call attention to it, so perhaps this is a part of the past of some mathematicians that I know, but I just don't know about this aspect of their past.


text:
Can my institute use my figure and put their name on it for press releases, etc.?
I was wondering if my institute can use a figure which I made for a paper that has been published and crop it slightly and use it for press releases, etc., and instead of putting my name underneath the figure, they just put the institute's name.
Is it generally OK for them to do so, or should they give me credit?

Is the figure displayed in a context that describes your work?

Do you have a work contract that says anything about that?

@mynameis. Don't forget to state from where you are! In some countries, even if you signed-off the "copy-rights" to a work, you may have "moral-rights", such as being recognized as an author for a particular work.

Regardless of the outcome, try to make sure you've got a permanent copy.  There must be something quite nice about your work, even if it's only a pretty figure, and you can mention it if you're asked about communicating your research (beyond academia) in the future.

It depends. If (1) you once signed a contract that allows the university to do so, and (2) they contacted your publisher to obtain authorization for duplicating the figure, this may be legally allowed. That depends a bit on the laws in your country, which often differ in such matters.
It is certainly bad style, though. Also, PR offices that are careful enough the think of condition (2) will typically also contact you prior to publication of the press release - especially since cropping of the figure occurred. Also: Don't attribute malice to a deed when other possibilities exist. For example, they could have asked you advisor, who said that this would be fine (whether this is OK by the advisor to do so is a different question). Also, replacing your name by the university name could have been the work of an unexperienced intern in the office, etc.
Perhaps you can contact them and ask if this is a mistake. If you want to go the easy route, you could just mention that you are concerned that the figure violates the publisher's copyright and that cropping the image may not be covered by the agreement they gave. In the same mail/call, you could offer help with this potential problem by provide them with the needed source information for a proper "image citation" and helping with obtaining authorization by the publisher (if needed). You could also express genuine concerns that potential future collaborators on research questions related to the figure could use the information of you being the source to establish contact, which would potentially be beneficial for both your career and the future reputation of the university (by strengthening the research done at your institution).

This depends a lot on your arrangement with the university, as well as the context of the figure:
As DCTLib has already pointed out in their answer, first of all, the copyright legislation this is subject to has an influence on this, both with respect to you as well as any publishers of the paper. The legal side of this may also be related to whatever may be stated in any contracts you signed.
Now, concerning the question whether this is a "good way" to do things, I am used to arrangements where the unspoken agreement exists that any graphic produced by an employee of the university during their work is free for PR people and similar to use in presentations. Your mileage may vary, though I personally always perceived that as extremely convenient, as that means I had more time for my research and less time being bothered by requests to help with public relations of the university or the department. There are people being paid for doing that PR work, and I am glad about every second they save of my time.
Things get critical if there could be a considerable benefit by mentioning your name (that you expect to be absent if only the university or department name is mentioned).

Is the figure embedded in a press release that targets an academic audience, possibly specific to your topic? In that case, it could indeed be crucial to provide direct contact info. On the other hand, if the target audience is really that specific, I would wonder why you were not asked to write the text yourself in the first place, as PR departments are not normally specialized in accurately conveying very specific information on research.

And even if this is the case, consider the goal the university is trying to achieve - is it meant as a here-and-now info (so getting in touch with you is realistic), or is it supposed to say "This is what we did in field X in 2015.", which will then be provided as a proof for the permanent activity in your field when applying for a project grant long after you personally have left that university?

On the other hand, is the press release rather for a general audience? In such a case, figures are often not expected to be understood in depth, and are rather meant to convey a general sense of awe for the "pretty colourful things that are produced at the university". Note that this includes both public settings (newspaper articles for everyone) and professional settings (funding reports that will be checked by financial people who do not have the slightest idea about the actual content of the research and who just want to see that something is being done that justifies the expenses for staff and equipment).

Lastly, it can be considered a very similar situation to how other products are attributed. Have a look into the About boxes of Microsoft Visual Studio or Google Chrome - they only say that they're by Microsoft and Google, respectively. Likewise, product description websites such as this, this, or this merely provide the company name as the only form of attribution along with the screenshots. The single developers or designers are not listed, but if there is any reason to contact them, that contact can certainly be established by contacting the indicated organization.


text:
What do you do when you are asked to perform an official review for a journal of a manuscript written by your supervisor?
I was just handed a paper for review (official review request by an editor of a journal) written by my current supervisor (the guy with the grant). I have not been involved in this work, and I don't feel inclined to dish out any free goodwill on behalf of him being my supervisor.
I'm well qualified to review it, and I think I would do a good job of it, but I'm worried that this constitutes a conflict of interest, and that I should decline. What is common practice around reviewing co-workers' papers?

What do you mean here by "for review"? Is this just your supervisor handing you the paper and asking you for comments, or is the part of an official peer review process? (That is, has a third party editor of a journal asked you be an anonymous peer reviewer for a paper authored by your supervisor?)

@R.M. Official review process, yes, I had a third party editor of a journal ask me to be an anonymous peer reviewer for a paper authored by my supervisor...

Frankly, this is a red flag on the journal. Several publishers I know (including e.g. APS) will regard "works in the same institution" as a conflict of interest as far as peer review goes. If I were asked to review my current supervisor's output then I would have a severely reduced opinion of that journal's peer review process - how do you know that X paper in that journal  wasn't reviewed by someone inside the same group? How do you know whether they declined to 'dish out free goodwill', or whether they only said they didn't but they put a thumb on the scale anyway?

What might be even more concerning is that it's possible that they authors proposed the OP for a reviewer, knowing the dependency relation with them

If this is an informal request for internal review -- definitely go ahead. It is common practice to have close associates review work, and your thoughtful comments will gain you respect.
If this is a formal invitation from a journal -- it is a clear conflict of interest.  It probably should never have been sent to you, quite honestly.  This is not to say you couldn't provide an unbiased, thoughtful review, but to an outsider this would really be questionable. I suggest you take the high road, decline the invitation, and send a letter to the action editor reminding him of your close association.

It's the second option that I've encountered. I have informed the editor, but I have not heard anything back yet.

Would it be appropriate to do the review and also clearly state to the editor when submitting the review that you have a conflict of interest?

@pbond, no. The review could take some time and the editor should reject the review when they learn about the conflict. So, you have just wasted the editor's time. The editor needs to get another reviewer on board as soon as possible.

@Arnfinn You shouldn't expect to hear back from the editor. They asked you for a review, you declined due to a conflict of interest, and that's it. Perfectly fine.

@pbond It's fair to inform the editor that you're the author's graduate, you can leave the decision to them; they may decide that it's fine for you to do the review, but it's their decision, not yours.

Definitely don't do it. Write to the editor and decline. Often, journals will have some explicit guidelines on who appropriate referees are and what conflict-of-interest rules apply. Even beyond being able to give an unbiased review is a related standard, which is, "Would this give the appearance of major conflict if this were openly known?" To that end, I would suggest it is always inappropriate to referee papers by:

Your supervisor (or, the other way around, probably also former trainees)
Anyone in your department who could be voting on your tenure
Family members
Direct competitors (i.e. where there could be a possibility to compete to publish a result first, or where you know you are both applying for the same fellowship).

I think the first three are examples where there is no way to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. The fourth has a lot more wiggle room, of course, because there can always be some competition if you are close enough to referee the paper well!

I agree - that's why I think there is more wiggle room on that part. Obviously, you could be applying for the same (broad) grant as someone you're refereeing. But there are some specific circumstances where I think it is potentially troublesome.

"Anyone who could be voting on your tenure" is a really large set, so I think that's a little bit overcautious (particularly if the reviewing is anonymous, as it usually is).

I agree on the "anyone who could be voting on your tenure," so I've edited it to make sure it only refers to your department members, not external referees. Again, the standard really is: how awful would this look if it was publicly known you were the referee? If you're refereeing your department chair... pretty bad.

In borderline cases, one can point it out to the editor as a potential conflict of interest, and let editor judge whether they think it’s too conflicting.

The problem is not so much that you couldn't be objective: probably you could. However, it is also for your protection to argue a Conflict of Interest.
Imagine you give a good review, then your judgement will be in doubt, even if justified. The review will not be considered very informative.
Imagine you give a bad one - if that comes out, you can be in a lot of trouble, being in a dependency relation to your superviser.
There are very good reasons to refuse.

I agree with other answers that you should not do the review. Here is an example of conflict of interest: http://www.sigmod2015.org/calls_papers_sigmod_research.shtml

A paper author has a conflict of interest with a PC member when and
  only when one or more of the following conditions holds:

The PC member is a co-author of the paper.
The PC member has been a co-worker in the same company or university    within the past two years
The PC member has been a collaborator within the past two years.
The PC member is or was the author's primary thesis advisor, no    matter how long ago.
The author is or was the PC member's primary thesis advisor, no    matter how long ago.
The PC member is a relative or close personal friend of the author.

Papers with incorrect or incomplete conflict of interest information
  as of the submission closing time are subject to immediate rejection.

Another concern is that your supervisor can recognize your writing style in the review, and this can lead to awkward situation. This is very likely since you and him/her probably co-authored a paper before, you send him/her emails everyday. You may have a habit of language usage that you yourself don't recognize, but everyone else do.
Sometime, I do review for conferences that adopt double-blinded review, and I can correctly guess the authors. Because I read a lot of their papers in the past, and unintentionally train a classifier in my mind to recognize their writing style :).

The question not asked yet is: Do you want to review the paper?
If you don't then refuse it on behalf of conflict of interest.
If you are confident you will do good job and you want to do it, then inform the editor that one of the authors is your supervisor and that there might be conflict of interest. And let the editor to decide.

There is conflict of interest by default in these cases, because we can be biased even if we don't want to be. It's not about doing a good or bad job. Even knowing the authors can affect your review (although most often it's unavoidable not to know anyone). And I don't mean you will accept a manuscript that would otherwise go for rejection. It's small things adding up to a not so negative review or to a more positive than it deserves. In any case, as an editor you can't trust unless you are certain that the review is as objective as possible.


text:
Dangers of allowing students to resubmit assignments
There are two closely related questions here:

If a student submits their assignment and is unhappy with their mark, are there any dangers (which I might not be seeing) in allowing the students to do so? If I would offer for one, I would offer for all, but should I be offering it in the first place?
If resubmits are unavailable, some students ask me to 'pre-read' or 'pre-mark' their assignment. The end result is that when they submit officially, that may actually be the second submission. Clearly doing any 'pre-marking' or the like takes time and energy and, so far, very few students have taken advantage of this until right before the submission deadline (at which point I stop because I don't have THAT much time to offer them). Are there dangers in 'pre-marking' assignments?

Note: These assignments constitute either 50% or 100% of their total mark.
One of my concerns is that the student would have lower motivation to maximize the quality of their original work and just correct what was marked as a problem area - like a production worker depending on a Quality Control Inspector and not paying as much attention to the quality of their work the first time around. Are there other issues as well?
EDIT: I should add that these are business management subjects so student answers are not easily right or wrong but more about how they justify their analysis. Therefore, there is not an issue of "giving the right answer."

You should also ask about the danger involved in not allowing this, since it's pretty significant.

@BrendanLong I asked based on the assumption that pre-marking and multiple submissions of the same work is not common amongst teachers. However, I would be interested to hear the other side (of not allowing this)

The danger of not allowing retries is that you perpetuate a system where students are taught that if they fail at something, they should give up. In the real world, the most successful people are the ones who take risks, and understand that failure is just part of the learning process. At my job, failure isn't considered a problem unless I failed and didn't learn something from it.

@BrendanLong I'm not sure about this. The idea has always been you do your best. If you don't achieve all you hoped to then take the lessons learned and apply them to do better next time. We don't get several chances to be first to market. We do get several chances to succeed overall in business and students also get several assignments to pass a module. One poor assignment does not condemn them to failing that module.

Why would you want to do this?

@DanielE.Shub I would do this to allow students to improve the quality of their work. There are clearly costs and benefits (see answers below). I'm wondering about the unforeseen dangers.

I actually have a standing policy that any student can resubmit ANY assignment, all semester long.  However they cannot expect a top grade from a late submission.  So if a student gets a C in week two and resubmits in week 4 with a perfect answer that might move the grade from C to B, but not to A since they didn't complete the assignment on the first shot.  If a student earned a B+ the resubmit is not worth it?  I've had a lot of students take advantage of this offer and it allows them to improve their grade and better their understanding of the subject matter (computer science).

Should I be offering it in the first place?

Dangers:

You spend even more time on assignments, limiting your time for other endeavors.
Students might get into a "grade grubbing" mode where they simply re-submit marginally better answers in order to improve their grade.
Students do a poor job initially because they know they will have a chance to re-submit, and they might as well take their chances that you'll give them decent marks for inferior work.

Benefits:

Overall, students spend more time on the assignments, leading to better knowledge and ability to do the work.
You can provide helpful information to guide them to better answers (because you're seeing first-attempts). This level of grading also takes more time.
Students are happier because the stress of a hard deadline isn't so bad.

I think the benefits outweigh the dangers if you're willing to put in the extra time to re-grade. As I've said in other threads, I've used auto-grading homework for a some classes (probably not relevant in your case), but I've used the strategy that I'd have deadlines for all the assignments but that the week before the final I'd re-open all the assignments and tell the students they can re-do any questions they missed. I don't tell them I'm going to do this until I do it, in order to keep students from simply waiting until the end to do all the assignments.

Are there dangers in 'pre-marking' assignments

I think it's great that you're being creative with the assignments (e.g., pre-marking, resubmittals, etc.). Again, it comes down to your time -- if you have motivated students who want pre-marking and you have the time, I can't see a problem with it. It wouldn't surprise me if the best students are the ones who want pre-marked work, but then again I've had some less-capable students jump at chances like that to do better.

I had a professor that would let us resubmit our tests (one time), but for only half of the credit back. So if you got a 50 on the test initially, you could only get a 75 if you corrected it to a perfect submission. I feel that this could alleviate some of the risk with your third danger because students who do poorly on the first try are more limited by what they can get back. Additionally, the one re-submit limit helps with spending too much time grading and any grade grubbing. The problem with this class was that it was always necessary to resubmit because class average was around 30-40%.

@Gray I actually prefer that method; I wrote an answer around the same time as you commented.

It's certainly tricky!  There are a number of pitfalls, I've found, that usually end up making it not worth the effort:

A lot more work for you.  Grading twice may be no biggie in a class of 10, but a class size of 200 or 300 would be prohibitive.
The students will, in all likelihood, not try as hard the first time around, since they know they automatically get an extension.
Grade inflation.  This may not be a big deal to some (it's a minor crusade of mine) but it can be a major issue.  If the entire class is getting >90%, your superiors may be suspicious.
Similarly, the more successful kids are liable to get annoyed.  What's the point of busting your hump to be an A-student if the B- and C-students can resubmit and do just as well?

That being said, there are some good work-arounds; nothing you can do about class size, but here are some ideas:

Don't tell them beforehand!  This is a bit devious, and you can only do it once and not on the final, but most people will, after a hard midterm or something, appreciate that hugely.  This will ensure most everyone works their butt off instead of slacking first time around.
Give them half credit for resubmitted answers.  That is, if a student gets an 80%, but the resubmit is 100%, give him/her a 90%.  This can be a good (enough) balance: The poorly-performing students get a sufficient boost, but not enough to threaten or annoy the high-performers.  This also reduces the overall grade-inflation risk.
In the vein of pre-marking, since there's no "right answer," you can accept "drafts" and then spend some time going over some of the more and less successful avenues students chose.  Everyone may end up doing something similar, but students will end up thinking more about their answers.

I think the half-credit method can work well. Like I mentioned in my other comment, I think this introduces some new dangers. The tests/assignments shouldn't be written in such a way that a student cannot reasonably expect to pass it on the first try. This could result in (at least the appearance) of lazy teaching - couldn't prepare effectively for attempt 1, so they make it up after they know exactly what to study. The other problem is that the workload for your particular class becomes higher since students have to do each test/assignment twice - something I think a lot of teachers forget.

Couldn't agree more.

I had a class where this was generalized, so that when re-grading, you lost 10% per re-grading (or day?), so you could submit a project 8 times, but by the 8th time, you can only get 20% of the points back. It worked well in that class because it was programming, so re-grading takes almost no effort, but I think it's worthwhile to allow as many re-grading attempts as you're willing to put time into. The result of this policy was that people did really well in that class, because people put in the effort to make their programs good instead of good-enough.

Since the field you're in is different from mine (mathematics), what I am about to describe may not work for you, but perhaps some variant of it could work.
I am quite fond of allowing students to make corrections to assignments (especially quizzes and exams), with the following rules:
1) Students may only resubmit an assignment once.
2) The corrected solutions must be flawless. There is no partial credit on resubmissions.
3) The students can earn back half of the points that they lost on their first submission. So if they scored a 4/10 on a problem the first time around, and if they submit a flawless corrected version, they will improve this to a 7/10. They cannot do any better, and there is nothing in between.
It has been my experience that this is a great way to get students to correct and learn from their mistakes, and I cannot find a downside to it. After all, my goal is to get the students to learn the material!
Since your assignments do not have clear-cut answers (as you describe in your edit), this might need some tweaking. You may need to replace "flawless" with "would have earned very high marks" or something to that effect. But the point remains: I think that allowing students to resubmit assignments is a valuable tool.

Occasionally, students will ask me to pregrade or review an assignment prior to submission.  I am always happy to do so, but I don't give them a grade, just feedback on what is good, what is lacking, and what needs improvement.  I find this is a good compromise.

Regarding the first scenario: if you give out solutions, there's obviously a problem. But if you hold off on giving out solutions, then the remaining students have to wait longer than might be reasonable.

This made me realize I skipped something important. I've edited the question accordingly.

One advantage of allowing resubmits that hasn't been pointed out is that it allows you assign more challenging material without scaring the students too much.

I think the problem lies in what expectations the students have. With a clear set of grading criteria (c.f. rubrics) you could probably avoid some or many problems. In the second case, you could say that pre-grading provides a preliminary grade which. at best, will be raised by one notch upon successful resubmission. Then, the student will get feedback and know where they are and make a decision of putting the effort it worth it. Clearly, this simple example is not thought through so I believe this case may need a serious think and discussion with peers on possible side effects. But, the point is that if you make the grading clear then there will be less complaints.
Your first case is perhaps trickier. The same idea applies, you need to apply some clear rule of what happens with a resubmission. It is possible that if your design of the criteria for case 2 is good, then as a side-effect case 1 disappears. You should also consider reducing grades for late arrivals etc.
Although this reply is not very precise, I think setting up criteria that makes the grading process clear will help. By putting in an optional pre-assessment, you make the students decide what they should do. Note that the criteria for the assignment also have to be clear so that the grades you set can be explained in terms of learning objectives.

I agree with Peter about setting up clear criteria -- whether that is, for instance, only letting students gain a certain percentage more for the assignment, or otherwise, having something you can point to if students try to go beyond the parameters will help.

Thanks for these thoughts. I actually provide a rubric but some (the weaker) students have difficulty marking their own paper.