We met on Fri Nov 12 @ 12:40 to discuss Chapter 3: “Just One Change (Just Kidding): Ungrading and Its Necessary Accompaniments” by Susan Blum Chapter 4: “Shifting the Grading Mindset” by Starr Sackstein. 

The conversation centered on Blum’s chapter and approach to self-assessment and self-reflective grading practices and Sackstein’s argument around changing the way we think about assessment versus grading. 

The chapters first provoked us to think about changing our thinking about what learning looks like in our classes and how we assess students’ learning. When we think of assessment as a way to gauge what and how much students learn, rather than through the lens of mastery, we begin to see learning as a buildable process. Being online because of COVID has made many of the FIG members hyper alert to the quantity of work they assign and whether or not all that work is necessary. A lot of us are looking at our curricula and wondering what is really necessary for students to learn, and pairing down our content and assignments. 

We also realized that many of us build processes into our classes and encourage revision. We keep the expectation high, but we also give students a chance to grow over time and embrace the recursive feedback process. Questions like “do you have to pair an exam with a grade?–couldn’t an instructor leave feedback instead of a grade? Wouldn’t that be the same thing?” While the principles of ungrading appear more equitable than traditional grades, many faculty members in the group see grades as a way to motivate students through a language students understand. One member reminded us that “students know what an 80 means” and their level of proficiency based on the indicator. We also acknowledge that our college’s LMS does not help us de-emphasize grades. An instructor using the college’s LMS cannot give feedback to a student without inputting points or a grade in order for the feedback the teacher left to register in the system. Thus grades technically trigger other forms of assessment, instead of other forms of assessment taking center-stage. 

The chapters inspired us to consider alternate forms of assessment, such as, portfolio assessment, drafting/revising, self-assessment, peer-review, commenting on students’ work humanly, and self-grading. And some faculty discussed starting a conversation in their department and in certain programs around ungrading.  

As we shifted the conversation, it was noted that Blum was really explaining ways to shift the power out of the hands of the instructor and into the hands of the students. Some folks interpreted Blum to suggest we “turn grading and assessment over to students in ways that empower them.” This admittedly requires that we relinquish control, steer students into process and engage in the actual learning, which can be laborious. But, she also reminds teachers that learning should be enjoyable and that joy is what generates intrinsic motivation. 

Next meeting Fri Dec 3 @ 12:40 – Chapter 7: “Contract Grading and Peer Review” by Christina Katopodis and Cathy N. Davidson – Chapter 9: A STEM Ungrading Case Study: A Reflection on First-Time Implementation in Organic Chemistry” by Clarissa Sorensen-Unruh – Chapter 10: “The Point-less Classroom: A Math Teacher’s Ironic Choice in Not Calculating Grades” by Gary Chu