For the second meeting on Oct 22, 2021 at 12:40 EST, we discussed Chapter 1: “How to Ungrade” by Jesse Stommel  Chapter 2: “What Going Gradeless Taught Me about Doing the ‘Actual Work'” by Aaron Blackwelder.

The notes you find here are a combination of snippets from our conversation, individual ideas, some specific quotes, paraphrased thoughts from FIG members who were discussing and mulling over issues raised in the text.  

Stommel and Blackwelder’s UNgrading chapters continue to spur thoughtful and vigorous dialogue among the group. We come with a wide wide range of thinking around ungrading. Some of us more convertible, and others open, but  not yet persuaded. The central concern comes under questions of implementation in content courses where students have to show understanding of particular concepts and methods. A STEM instructor asks “how can math not give a number?” And how can we motivate students without grades? Can this work with our students? Though, they are hopeful to get some ideas to take back to the classroom. But some members also noted that if high school teachers, under the grip of the DOE can try these ungrading methods, then we should be able to find a way to do it in our college classes. Some STEM instructors thought about teaching how a scientist thinks and learns, instead of teaching concepts. But they are also trying to balance the have to learn with the what students actually learn. One instructor says that if they, faculty teaching the course, do not ensure students know the content, then they are setting them up to fail. 

The group thoughtfully brings in ideas from the book and talks about how conferencing might alleviate some of the inequity, support students’ learning, and help instructors glean what students understand through a different lens. We talked about how conferencing was a lot of work and daunting, and many of us acknowledged that it can. But we also know that fears of assessment are real and impose a great deal of pressure onto our students. But less laborious ideas around conferencing included: 

• One on one conferencing with students to glean understanding rather than giving multiple choice exams. 
• Conferencing to discuss or collaborate on grades at the end of the semester.
• Asking students what they learned and if they learned.
• Assigning short written, audio, or video pieces where students express content knowledge or understanding in asynchronous conferences. 
• Ask for process letters, where students explain their process getting to a certain answer or result. 
• Or any combinations from the above.

The book seems to allow us to expose and unpack some important inequities around grading, even if we are not averse to traditional grades. “We sometimes think we have to do something, and we do it. But the books is helping me think about the nuances and battling with what I believe.” Once again the concern around how grades favor the student who comes into our classrooms already prepared, who does not need as much guidance or instruction is shared among some of the FIG members. One FIG member wonders how much we value effort and growth and what it means to learn in our community college classrooms. In response to this another member says they feel a struggle to clearly differentiate effort. Others noted that when they took classes without grades, the pressure to achieve a certain grade was lifted, and thus the students could just enjoy the learning. In Blackwelder’s chapter, he explicitly says that we need to bring joy back into learning and “liberate the classroom.” And to some FIG members, grades not only stifle joy, but they “deaden learning.” FIG members note that even contract grading was noted in the book as problematic because it does not unearth an intrinsic motivation to learn but instead it gives students a different way to earn and grades. Though this might be more equitable and favor effort, it still centers and prioritizes grades. 

The conversation shifted to looking at the historical development of grades and the different assessment practices among the humanities and STEM.  This led us into a discussion about how grades neatly rank people and eventually became an efficiency method, designed to create docile workers. But, this only began when the working class started going to school. Before this, school was for the elites. Once FIG member, drew us to think about the community college context and what we are perpetuating by upholding ranking practices with our own working class students. 

We ended the meeting talking about curricular ideas that give students more choice, more joy, more learning. One instructor mentioned wanting to try a specification grading approach like “choose your own adventure” which she learned of from a colleague, and another instructor offered to bring curricular materials from public schools not following traditional grading practices so we could see models.   

Next meeting Fri Nov 12 @ 12:40  – Chapter 3: “Just One Change (Just Kidding): Ungrading and Its Necessary Accompaniments” by Susan Blum  – Chapter 4: “Shifting the Grading Mindset” by Starr Sackstein