The variety of alternative grading approaches can be overwhelming. Instructors might say, I want to change my grading practice, but should I go with specifications grading? Standards-based grading? Ungrading? Contract grading? Most real-life approaches to alternative grading don’t fit neatly into any of those boxes, and often none of these general categories will be a perfect fit to your students in your classes. And how are we supposed to keep up with all these terms? Do you have to be an expert even to get started?

It seems smarter to focus on the overall ideas that unify these different approaches. So this week, rather than introduce another kind of grading practice, we’re going to pull back to a higher altitude and try to distill what all these ideas have in common and come up with a general framework for these practices. Not a “definition” of anything — there’s still too many idiosyncrasies and varied practices to hope for something that’s both precise and general — but instead a map, with room for interpretation, that stakes out some of the common ground that we seem to be walking together.

A couple of weeks ago I posted about the "System Myth", that before any meaningful work can be done with alternative grading, we must have large-scale systemic changes to the system of education in which it takes place. One of the reasons this is a myth is that it is possible to take small steps, which involve little to no additional effort to implement, toward reforming and improving the way we grade in higher education. It's not only possible to do this, faculty are doing this on a daily basis in all kinds of professional situations where a full-scale system-changing approach might not be feasible or possible. Those small, incremental steps can lead to real improvements in students' learning experiences.

In a recent poll on Twitter, I asked people who are using alternative grading how they got started: Was it with a complete redesign of an existing system or by making one or more small, incremental changes to a traditional approach? Most said the latter.

In am earlier post, I suggested a framework for starting small: Pick one of the Four Pillars, and do one thing related to it. In the spirit of this blog and our book, which is to give not only big ideas but concrete and sensible blueprints for action, I came up with 20 different ways you might use this framework to implement small changes. Not all of these will make sense for your situation. But maybe some will spark an idea.

Sharona Krinsky and Robert Bosley are classroom educators dedicated to changing the way we grade students in the classroom. We believe that grading can either be a tool used to not only measure learning but also encourage it, or it can be an overpowering force for destruction in the classroom. In this podcast, we will delve deeply into the many facets and nuances of grading in both the K-12 and Higher Ed classroom. Ranging across disciplines and institutional formats, we will bring to life the impact of grading on students and practical, detailed, research-driven practices that can change grading from a destructive force to one that enhances student success and learning.

In each episode, we will dive deep into the topic of grading and its impact on student motivation, engagement, and overall success. We will discuss the latest research and best practices in alternative grading systems, including formative assessments, standards-based grading, and student-centered grading.

Our guests will share their experiences and insights into the challenges and successes of implementing alternative grading systems in their classrooms. From identifying gaps in student understanding to providing targeted feedback, our podcast will provide a space for educators to explore and discuss new ways to assess student learning.

Whether you are a teacher, administrator, or education policy-maker, this podcast is a must-listen for anyone interested in improving student learning outcomes and creating a more equitable and inclusive education system.

Are you satisfied with your current and traditional grading system? Does it accurately reflect your students’ learning and progress? Can it be gamed? Does it lead to grade-grubbing and friction with your students? The authors of this book – two professors of mathematics with input from colleagues across disciplines and institutions – offer readers a fundamentally more effective and authentic approach to grading that they have implemented for over a decade.

Recognizing that traditional grading penalizes students in the learning process by depriving them of the formative feedback that is fundamental to improvement, the authors offer alternative strategies that encourage revision and growth. Alternative grading is concerned with students’ eventual level of understanding. This leads to big changes: Students take time to review past failures and learn from them. Conversations shift from “why did I lose a point for this” to productive discussions of content and process. Alternative grading can be used successfully at any level, in any situation, and any discipline, in classes that range from seminars to large multi-section lectures.

In her latest book Linda Nilson puts forward an innovative but practical and tested approach to grading that can demonstrably raise academic standards, motivate students, tie their achievement of learning outcomes to their course grades, save faculty time and stress, and provide the reliable gauge of student learning that the public and employers are looking for. She argues that the grading system most commonly in use now is unwieldy, imprecise and unnecessarily complex, involving too many rating levels for too many individual assignments and tests, and based on a hairsplitting point structure that obscures the underlying criteria and encourages students to challenge their grades. This new specifications grading paradigm restructures assessments to streamline the grading process and greatly reduce grading time, empower students to choose the level of attainment they want to achieve, reduce antagonism between the evaluator and the evaluated, and increase student receptivity to meaningful feedback, thus facilitating the learning process - all while upholding rigor. In addition, specs grading increases students' motivation to do well by making expectations clear, lowering their stress and giving them agency in determining their course goals. Among the unique characteristics of the schema, all of which simplify faculty decision making, are the elimination of partial credit, the reliance on a one-level grading rubric and the "bundling" of assignments and tests around learning outcomes. Successfully completing more challenging bundles (or modules) earns a student a higher course grade. Specs grading works equally well in small and large class settings and encourages "authentic assessment." Used consistently over time, it can restore credibility to grades by demonstrating and making transparent to all stakeholders the learning outcomes that students achieve. This book features many examples of courses that faculty have adapted to spec grading and lays out the surprisingly simple transition process. It is intended for all members of higher education who teach, whatever the discipline and regardless of rank, as well as those who oversee, train, and advise those who teach.