Rethinking Grading Strategies: Fostering Fairness and Growth in Higher Education

In academic discussions about grading, traditional methodologies often come under scrutiny. Recent conversations among faculty reveal a complex relationship between grading practices and student outcomes, particularly as educators grapple with the impacts of conventional assessments on student performance and well-being.

It’s become increasingly clear that standard grading metrics, particularly the well-known 100-point scale, may do more harm than good. Research underscores that these systems frequently measure behavior or compliance instead of actual learning, leading to potential biases in evaluations. For instance, receiving a zero for missing an assignment can hinder a student's chance of recovery, severely impacting their overall academic standing. Many students, especially those from vulnerable backgrounds, feel discouraged from asking for accommodations due to rigid late-work policies, further complicating equitable access to education.

Despite significant advancements in various facets of higher education—like onboarding processes, institutional engagement strategies, and classroom learning designs—grading systems remain largely unchanged. This stagnation is curious given the documented benefits of alternative grading practices. Those practices, previously dismissed, are now recognized for their ability to motivate students, reduce anxiety, and significantly increase both retention and completion rates. They recognize students as human beings, equipped with real-life challenges, rather than merely points in a system.

Alternative Grading Practices

Equitable grading approaches are emerging as viable solutions to combat the rigidities of traditional systems. These practices counteract deficit mindsets by supporting students' self-efficacy and cultivating an environment that values learning and development. Here are a few noteworthy strategies:

• Exam and quiz retakes: Implementing this strategy can encourage a growth mindset, where students review their exams to understand their misconceptions.

• Ungraded homework: This method alleviates penalties for students managing commitments outside the classroom, enabling them to engage with homework at their own pace for deeper understanding.

• Minimum grading: By establishing a minimum grade threshold (like 50%), students have the opportunity to recover from poor performances, making the grading system less punitive.

• Specifications-based grading: In this method, students receive clear guidelines about what is needed to achieve each grade, creating transparency and allowing students to manage their time effectively.

These alternative practices simulate real-world scenarios. For instance, having multiple attempts at a driving test mirrors how life allows for mistakes and learning from them. Students benefit from adaptive grading methods, especially when personal challenges arise, such as family emergencies or health issues. Rethinking deadlines and consequences could consider real-life pressures rather than strictly adhering to arbitrary cut-offs.

Student Perspectives and Outcomes

Implementing these alternative grading practices has yielded promising results in various educational contexts. Faculty reports indicate trends aligning with existing research: enhanced success rates and lower anxiety levels among students. In focus group discussions, students articulated how these flexible grading strategies made a significant difference in their academic journeys:

“Without these modifications, I would have failed by now, as I underestimated how challenging this class would be.”

“I faced significant personal struggles when my mother passed. The flexibility here was a lifesaver compared to other classes.”

“Life happens quickly. It’s not right for someone to fail simply because they encountered difficulties.”

Ultimately, if the priority of education is genuine learning and growth, current grading methodologies often miss the mark. While external mandates exist, faculty autonomy allows educators to explore and implement equitable strategies. Considering the expectations and realities of professional environments within specific disciplines can guide instructors toward more humane and practical grading techniques. By engaging in these adjustments, educators can contribute to students' readiness for the broader world beyond academia, not just complying with grading standards but cultivating true learning.

Amanda Colosimo, EdD, is a Professor of Geology at Monroe Community College, bringing over two decades of teaching experience to her role. She focuses her research on equitable grading practices and their impact on student motivation and success.

Benjamin Schermerhorn, PhD, chairs the Physics and Engineering Department at Monroe Community College. His research interests lie in alternative grading and improving educational outcomes through evidence-based practices.

References

1. Buckmiller, Tom, et al. "Questioning Points and Percentages: Standards-Based Grading (SBG) in Higher Education." College Teaching 65, no. 4 (2017): 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2017.1302919

2. Carrell, Scott E., and Michal Kurlaender. "My Professor Cares: Experimental Evidence on the Role of Faculty Engagement." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 15, no. 4 (2023): 113–141. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20210699

3. Dweck, Carol S. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House, 2006.

4. Feldman, Joe. Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2024.

5. Morris, Sarah Ruth, and Alison Heape Johnson. “Could Minimum Grading Enhance High School Graduation Rates and Cost-Effectiveness across Arkansas?” Education Policy Analysis Archives 32, no. 40 (2024). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.32.8496

6. Reeves, Douglas B. "The Case against the Zero." Phi Delta Kappan 86, no. 4 (2004): 324–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170408600418