Kate Cammack, CfT Co-Director
As we head into midterm grading, I wanted to share one of my struggles with grades, as I imagine I’m not alone in this.
Our family was caught up in Winter Olympics fever and we were cheering on the women’s cross-country skiers. When the first skier crossed the finish line, my younger son declared her “the best skier.” But was she?
What about the other women who were racing, who didn’t earn a medal?
What were their stories?
What if:
- One of them was coming back from a devastating injury?
- One of them didn’t get any sleep last night?
- One of them had the flu?
- One of them was the first-ever representative of their country in this sport?
- One of them was using borrowed skis, because hers were lost at the airport?
- One of them has been working to overcome performance anxiety?
- One of them had to swerve to avoid a dog on the course? (actually happened)
I wanted to tell my son, “They’re all so capable and have worked really, really hard. A gold medal reflects that work, to some extent. It also might have meant that, for that person on that day, conditions were ideal and everything went their way. Does it mean they’re the ‘best’? I’m not sure, because that suggests that everyone else wasn’t as successful as they were.”
One of my struggles with grading is that we can quickly lose the nuance of our students’ lived experiences. Students are humans, just like us, and they are often going through a lot more than we can see on the surface. And, these experiences can have very real impacts on the way that they’re able to engage with assessments, particularly one-time, high-stakes versions (e.g., a midterm exam). To what extent does a grade that they receive indicate their actual learning, in a way that’s not obscured by the complexities of life?
I’ve found myself spending a lot of time considering grading/assessment strategies that feel more humanizing and also hold students accountable for their learning. How might we prioritize students’ progress and growth in an area, and how might we rethink our assessment practices so that they actually reflect those processes? How can we (un)structure grades to help students focus more on their own learning processes and less on comparing/ranking themselves against each other? Can we expand our thinking about grades, so that every person is able to show their learning in accurate, meaningful, and achievable ways?
I realize that one of the exciting parts of the Olympics is the high level of competition and that (typically) only one gold medal is awarded for each event.
I also think that, in academia, we can build structures that more accurately reflect deep learning and growth, and don’t penalize students for having an off-day. Maybe when we’re talking about leveling the playing field, we’re actually talking about increasing access to the podium.
In May, we’ll be re-launching a popular Brightspace mini-course called “The Grading Question”, designed by Stephanie Batkie. It is an opportunity for us to reconsider what grading means and how we might more accurately assess our students’ learning. Many of us are rethinking our current approaches in the context of GenAI. This mini-course invites us to re-evaluate what we value, what assessment structures are possible, and how a fresh approach can benefit our students.
Additional recommended reading (please email me if you’d like to borrow any of these books!):
- A Pedagogy of Kindness by Cate Denial
- Grading for Growth by Clark & Talbert
- Ungrading edited by Susan Blum
- Failing our Future by Josh Eyler