My Experiment in Grading

Spring 2021, I decided to embark on an experiment with grading in my undergraduate courses. It was a fantastic experiment that resulted in a huge amount of data points to analyze. As a result, I can unequivocally state that - contemporary business students are not ready for contract/specification grading.

Specification grading is intended to place emphasis on learning and not on arbitrary letter grades. Add clear specifications to assignments - for example, submit a pdf with this number of pages and this number of paragraphs - and encourage students to focus on the material and not on "I want to earn a 97%". On day 1 of class, I distributed my syllabus to 210 students. Each assignment had clear specifications, almost all of which were formatting or submission-based. Taking a page from my liberal arts colleagues, I included an extensive amount of writing assignments. And finally, added an element from contract grading. Letter grades would be based on effort - if you want an "A", complete all assignments, attend class, participate in class, and work well with your group. Don't care about an A? Do less work.

So what happened?

A lot, actually.

This was the most polarized semester I've ever taught. Students who understood this new-to-them grading system flourished, personally thanked me, enjoyed class, and gave me great end-of-course evaluations. Students who never adjusted to my teaching & grading style floundered at best, foundered at worst, and left the harshest E-O-C evaluation comments I've ever received.

What does this mean?

Tactically, it was an awesome learning experience for both the students and the teacher. Focusing on the vast majority - flourishing students who enjoyed the new style - they broke out of their comfort zone, engaged in high levels of critical thinking, and didn't stress out about their grades.

Strategically, this also reveals to me an intense problem with the education system. It makes me wonder what the best assessment of learning is for the types of classes I teach. I ask students each semester to remember 1 thing that a previous class taught them, and each semester I'm greeted by blank stares. So even though they earned an "A" in this course, if they can't remember anything they learned in a 17-week class - 17 weeks, 34 class sessions, >50 hours of lecture, upwards of 150+ hours of out-of-class learning - then what are we doing wrong? How can their learning be assessed at an excellent level at the end of a semester (A means excellent quality work, not just mediocre, well above average) but 4 weeks later, that same learning not be demonstrable?

I don't have answers yet, but at least I have data. My personal bias is that we, in higher education, have a problem. Exams and grades and worksheets are intended to assess learning. Instead of contributing to the learning experience, though, much of what we do to assess learning actually hampers student learning & retention, and does a disservice to our students. I draw this conclusion based on these 210 students who struggled with ambiguity - not of the course or course concepts, but instead with the ambiguity of not knowing what arbitrary letter would be assigned to them at the end of the semester.