Alternative Grading Models: Difference between revisions

From CAT Base
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
Jtodd1 (talk | contribs)
Trustworthy, Bureaucrats
264 edits
Jtodd1 (talk | contribs)
Trustworthy, Bureaucrats
264 edits
Fixed links
Jtodd1 (talk | contribs)
Trustworthy, Bureaucrats
264 edits
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
== Abstract ==
== Abstract ==
Traditional grading systems tend to orient students toward point accumulation rather than learning, generate anxiety (particularly for first-generation and underrepresented students), and produce feedback that students rarely engage with once a grade has been assigned. Alternative grading approaches shift the focus toward evidence of learning and reduce adversarial faculty-student dynamics by moving rigor to course design rather than evaluation.
Traditional grading systems tend to orient students toward point accumulation rather than learning, generate anxiety (particularly for first-generation and underrepresented students), and produce feedback that students rarely engage with once a grade has been assigned. Alternative grading approaches shift the focus toward evidence of learning and reduce adversarial faculty-student dynamics by moving rigor to course design rather than evaluation.
* Contract Grading establishes a written agreement at the start of the semester in which students commit to a defined body of work in exchange for a defined grade. Contracts are typically tiered (C, B, A), with each level requiring progressively more engagement. Grading becomes binary — work is either fulfilled or not — which reduces grade disputes and repositions faculty as coaches rather than judges.
* Contract Grading establishes a written agreement at the start of the semester in which students commit to a defined body of work in exchange for a defined grade.
* Specifications Grading assesses work as complete or incomplete against clearly published criteria. Students may revise and resubmit assignments, with "tokens" used to limit revision volume. Because feedback is tied to a subsequent revision opportunity, students have a concrete reason to act on it.
* Specifications Grading assesses work as complete or incomplete against clearly published criteria.
* Ungrading removes grades from individual assignments entirely. Students receive qualitative feedback throughout the semester and complete a self-assessment at the end; the instructor reviews and either confirms or negotiates the final grade. The model centers student metacognition and requires significant structural scaffolding and mutual trust.
* Ungrading removes grades from individual assignments entirely. Students receive qualitative feedback throughout the semester and complete a self-assessment at the end.
* Negotiated Grading involves students and instructor co-determining what will count as evidence of learning and how it will be evaluated. This may include grading conferences — structured conversations in which both parties bring evidence and arrive at a grade collaboratively. The approach increases student ownership but is the most labor-intensive of the four, particularly in course design.
* Negotiated Grading involves students and instructor co-determining what will count as evidence of learning and how it will be evaluated.


{{#widget:YouTube|id=}}
{{#widget:YouTube|id=}}
== Resources ==
== Resources ==
*[[https://gamma.app/docs/Alternative-Grading-Models-That-Work-for-Students-Faculty-e7oilodl9vf8whi Alternative Grading Models Slidedeck (on Gamma.app)]]
* [https://gamma.app/docs/Alternative-Grading-Models-That-Work-for-Students-Faculty-e7oilodl9vf8whi Alternative Grading Models Slidedeck (on Gamma.app)]


== References ==
== References ==
* Artze-Vega, I., Darby, F., Dewsbury, B., & Imad, M. (2023). ''The Norton guide to equity-minded teaching''. W. W. Norton & Company.
* Artze-Vega, I., Darby, F., Dewsbury, B., & Imad, M. (2023). ''The Norton guide to equity-minded teaching''. W. W. Norton & Company.
* Blum, S. D. (Ed.). (2020). ''Ungrading: Why rating students undermines learning (and what to do instead)''. West Virginia University Press.
* Blum, S. D. (Ed.). (2020). ''Ungrading: Why rating students undermines learning (and what to do instead)''. West Virginia University Press.
* Budde, T. (2023, July 24). Why I no longer grade my college students. ''Grading for Growth''. [[https://gradingforgrowth.com/p/why-i-no-longer-grade-my-college]]
* Budde, T. (2023, July 24). Why I no longer grade my college students. ''Grading for Growth''. [https://gradingforgrowth.com/p/why-i-no-longer-grade-my-college https://gradingforgrowth.com/p/why-i-no-longer-grade-my-college]
* Center for Grading Reform. (n.d.). ''The grading conference''. [[https://www.thegradingconference.com]]
* Center for Grading Reform. (n.d.). ''The grading conference''. [https://www.thegradingconference.com https://www.thegradingconference.com]
* Danielewicz, J., & Elbow, P. (2009). A unilateral grading contract to improve learning and teaching. ''College Composition and Communication, 61''(2), 244-268.
* Danielewicz, J., & Elbow, P. (2009). A unilateral grading contract to improve learning and teaching. ''College Composition and Communication, 61''(2), 244-268.
* Donahoe, E. (2026). ''Unmaking the Grade''. [[https://emilypittsdonahoe.substack.com]]
* Donahoe, E. (2026). ''Unmaking the Grade''. [https://emilypittsdonahoe.substack.com https://emilypittsdonahoe.substack.com]
* Eyler, J. (2022, March 7). Grades are at the center of the student mental health crisis. ''Inside Higher Ed''. [[https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/grades-are-center-student-mental-health-crisis]]
* Eyler, J. (2022, March 7). Grades are at the center of the student mental health crisis. ''Inside Higher Ed''. [https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/grades-are-center-student-mental-health-crisis https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/grades-are-center-student-mental-health-crisis]
* Feldman, J. (2024). ''Grading for equity'' (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.
* Feldman, J. (2024). ''Grading for equity'' (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.
* Inoue, A. B. (2019). ''Labor-based grading contracts: Building equity and inclusion in the compassionate writing classroom''. The WAC Clearinghouse. [[https://wac.colostate.edu/books/perspectives/labor/]]
* Inoue, A. B. (2019). ''Labor-based grading contracts: Building equity and inclusion in the compassionate writing classroom''. The WAC Clearinghouse. [https://wac.colostate.edu/books/perspectives/labor/ https://wac.colostate.edu/books/perspectives/labor/]
* McCloud, L. I. (2023, April 17). Keeping receipts: Thoughts on ungrading from a Black woman professor. ''Zeal: A Journal for Liberal Arts, 1''(2). [[https://zeal.kings.edu/zeal/article/view/25]]
* McCloud, L. I. (2023, April 17). Keeping receipts: Thoughts on ungrading from a Black woman professor. ''Zeal: A Journal for Liberal Arts, 1''(2). [https://zeal.kings.edu/zeal/article/view/25 https://zeal.kings.edu/zeal/article/view/25]
* Miller, M.D. (2022, August 2). Ungrading light: 4 simple ways to ease the spotlight off points. ''The Chronicle of Higher Education''. [https://www.chronicle.com/article/ungrading-light-4-simple-ways-to-ease-the-spotlight-off-points https://www.chronicle.com/article/ungrading-light-4-simple-ways-to-ease-the-spotlight-off-points]  
* Nilson, L. B. (2015). ''Specifications grading: Restoring rigor, motivating students, and saving faculty time''. Stylus Publishing.
* Nilson, L. B. (2015). ''Specifications grading: Restoring rigor, motivating students, and saving faculty time''. Stylus Publishing.
* Winkelmes, M. (2026). ''TILT higher ed''. [[https://www.tilthighered.com]]
* Winkelmes, M. (2026). ''TILT higher ed''. [https://www.tilthighered.com https://www.tilthighered.com]
* Winkelmes, M.A., Bernacki, M. Butler, J. Zochowski, M. Golanics, J. Harriss Weavil, K. (2016). A Teaching Intervention that Increases Underserved College Students' Success, ''Peer Review 18''(1/2).
* Winkelmes, M.A., Bernacki, M. Butler, J. Zochowski, M. Golanics, J. Harriss Weavil, K. (2016). A Teaching Intervention that Increases Underserved College Students' Success, ''Peer Review 18''(1/2).
== Further Reading ==
* Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative. (2014, October). Two-stage exams. [https://cwsei.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/cwsei/resources/instructor/Two-stage_Exams.pdf https://cwsei.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/cwsei/resources/instructor/Two-stage_Exams.pdf]
* Chris Marriot - Computer Science. (2022, January 7). ''Using labor-based grading in your STEM classroom'' [Video]. YouTube. [https://youtu.be/MXiHhcdfrDk?si=UX8KxAcPYOIQJ0eb https://youtu.be/MXiHhcdfrDk?si=UX8KxAcPYOIQJ0eb]
* Donahoe, E.P., Dyer, J., Mattaini, K., and Tanner, E. (2025, December 12) Alternative Grading in Large Classes. ''Unmaking the Grade''. [https://emilypittsdonahoe.substack.com/p/alternative-grading-in-large-classes https://emilypittsdonahoe.substack.com/p/alternative-grading-in-large-classes]
* McKnelly, K.J., Howitz, W.J., Thane, T.A., and Link, R.D. (). Specifications grading at scale: Improved letter grades and grading-related interactions in a course with over 1,000 students, ''Journal of Chemical Education 100''(9). [https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00740 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00740]


[[Category: CAT+FD]]
[[Category: CAT+FD]]
Line 31: Line 39:
[[Category: Grading]]
[[Category: Grading]]
[[Category: Classroom Policies]]
[[Category: Classroom Policies]]
[[
[[Category: CAT Talk]]

Latest revision as of 14:05, 17 March 2026

A workshop titled "Mini-Workshop: Alternative Grading Models" originally presented for CAT+FD on 17 March 2026 by Dr. Jason Todd

Abstract

Traditional grading systems tend to orient students toward point accumulation rather than learning, generate anxiety (particularly for first-generation and underrepresented students), and produce feedback that students rarely engage with once a grade has been assigned. Alternative grading approaches shift the focus toward evidence of learning and reduce adversarial faculty-student dynamics by moving rigor to course design rather than evaluation.

  • Contract Grading establishes a written agreement at the start of the semester in which students commit to a defined body of work in exchange for a defined grade.
  • Specifications Grading assesses work as complete or incomplete against clearly published criteria.
  • Ungrading removes grades from individual assignments entirely. Students receive qualitative feedback throughout the semester and complete a self-assessment at the end.
  • Negotiated Grading involves students and instructor co-determining what will count as evidence of learning and how it will be evaluated.

Resources

References

Further Reading

Retrieved from "http://catwiki.xula.edu/index.php?title=Alternative_Grading_Models&oldid=6318"