"How Are You? Don't Ask, I'm Grading": Investigating Faculty Grading Emotions From a Control-Value Perspective

• In Event: Emotional Well-Being in Faculty: Construct Assessment and Motivational Antecedents

Abstract

Previous research showed that emotions play an important role in faculty members’ professional lives (Kordts-Freudinger, 2017; Stupnisky et al., 2016). Notably, the experience of discrete emotions differed between teaching and research. While positive emotions, such as enjoyment, pride, and satisfaction were more prominent in teaching, negative emotions such as anxiety, frustration, and helplessness were more prominent in research (Stupnisky et al., 2006, 2019). However, missing from this picture is another task that takes up considerable working time of faculty members: grading. Considering that grading is a key task among faculty members and that grades have important consequences for students’ success, we propose that grading is highly emotion-inducing. In the present study, we investigated faculty emotions during grading from a control-value-perspective (Pekrun, 2006). Control-value theory proposes that appraisals of control over a situation and its outcomes, as well as the importance and valence of a situation are key for a person’s emotions experienced in the situation. It has originally been proposed in the context of (learners’) achievement emotions, but we propose that it also applies to the emotions experienced by faculty during grading.

We collected data of 446 faculty members in the US (N = 245, 62% female, Mage = 47.12) and Germany (N = 201, 52% female, Mage = 38.41) through an online survey asking participants to report their experiences when grading papers. We assessed six discrete emotions (enjoyment, pride, relief, anxiety, anger, boredom), varied indicators of perceived control (control over the grading situation, content knowledge, diagnostic competence), and perceived value (social value [importance of grading for teaching and the relationship with students], diagnostic value [importance of assigning appropriate and fair grades], cost [negative valence]).

Across the two samples, differential correlational patterns for each discrete emotion emerged that were generally consistent with control-value-theory. Regarding control, diagnostic competence was positively associated with joy and pride, and negatively associated with anxiety and anger. Control over the grading situation was positively associated with pride and relief, and content knowledge was positively associated with pride. Regarding value, social value was positively associated with joy, pride, relief, and anxiety – thus emotions of both negative and positive valence. In contrast, cost was negatively related with joy and pride, and positively related with relief, anxiety, anger, and boredom. Overall, the most influential aspects for faculty emotions were diagnostic competence and cost.

Cross-cultural differences revealed that grading situations differed considerably between the US and Germany, for example, with respect to control over the grading situation [MUS = 7.91(1.51), MGer = 4.80(2.34)]. Additionally, US faculty reported higher diagnostic competence, content knowledge, as well as social and diagnostic value than German faculty. With respect to emotions, US faculty reported more joy, pride, relief, and anxiety, whereas German faculty reported more anger. In sum, this research yields first insights into emotions experienced by faculty during grading. These results further showed that grading emotions can be approached from a control-value perspective and suggest that grading experiences could be improved through training of diagnostic competencies and reduction of costs.

Authors

• Carolin Schwab, University of Munich

• Anne C. Frenzel, University of Munich (LMU)

• Jordan Jaeger, University of North Dakota

• Robert H. Stupnisky, University of North Dakota