The way we grade is influenced by our own inherent biases, personal experiences with teaching and learning, or disciplinary norms that are not fully visible to students. 

Grading equitably is part of building an inclusive teaching practice, informed by evidence-based principles that aim to improve learning for all students. Research recommends some baseline practices whether the grading system is commonly used or an “alternative” method of grading. 

Strategies for equitable grading

Incorporating the following strategies will help make your grading more equitable regardless of what grading method you use.

Transparency

Transparency about criteria, purpose, and effective preparation strategies. Ensuring students understand what they are evaluated on holistically in the class and on each graded assignment (whether a project, exam, presentation, etc.) Instructors can consider the following points in planning:

  • What are the skills or knowledge they will be demonstrating? Why is it important for them to demonstrate those things in the context of the course? 
  • If possible, show examples of successful work and provide opportunities for students to practice the relevant skills or knowledge ahead of time.
  • You might consider using a rubric to help students understand grading criteria; this resource is a good starting point. If you write a rubric, you may also want to consider potential challenges.
  • Clearly define purpose as well as criteria. This has been shown to significantly improve student success and motivation (Winkelmes et. al. 2016). You may even find it a helpful course design exercise to consider: What is the purpose of each element of assessment? How does it fit into the broader class goals?
  • Create space at multiple points in the semester for students to ask questions about grading and feedback. There are many ways to check in with students; if you want to brainstorm, please contact the Center for Teaching.

Feedback

Prioritizing feedback along with grades. Alone, grades do not show students how they can improve. Consider ways to use grades in concert with feedback to foster student motivation and engagement.

  • By themselves, grades only provide evaluation, but not necessarily a road to change. Effective feedback provides observations about performance and sometimes gives advice about productive next steps (Wiggins 2012). 
  • Comments like “Good job” or “Needs work” sometimes feel like feedback but are also primarily evaluative. Responding with simple praise or censure can lower student motivation (Koenka et. al. 2021).
  • Provide opportunities for students to reflect on feedback and grades in order to think about how they can improve by studying differently, building on previous work, etc. One strategy is to use a cognitive wrapper, as described in this Learning at Iowa resource.

Reduce Bias; Increase Motivation

Making your grading methods bias-resistant, motivational, and accurate as possible (Feldman 2019).

  • When possible, grade without knowing student identity. SpeedGrader in ICON allows this.
  • Encourage mistakes as part of the learning process and allow students to retake and redo as appropriate to encourage growth and learning.
  • Analyze how transparent the scale of your grading is to students (for example, how do you define the difference between percentage points, especially in areas like participation?)

Different methods of grading

There are many methods of grading; we have listed some of the most common below.  Consider your goals for student learning when selecting a method; see our references for further information, including research-based strategies for each one.

  • Criterion based grading: Students are graded against an absolute scale (e.g. 90-100 points equals an A, 80-89 points a B, etc.), with different expectations or outcomes associated with levels of the scale. It is, in theory, possible for all students in a class to get an A or a D. 
  • Norm-based grading: Students are evaluated in relationship to each other. The instructor/grader determines the proportion of students assigned to each grade (10% A, 25% B and so on) and does so based on average outcomes of all students. 
  • Specifications grading: Students are given specific parameters for what constitutes a pass or fail in each individual project/assignment/exam. The overall course grade is a letter grade comprised of how many passes or fails have been accrued by the student in instructor-defined scales called “bundles” or “clusters.” 
  • Contract grading: Students are allowed to decide which assignments to complete, understanding the impact their choices will have on grading; this is the "contract" between student and instructor. This allows students to chart their own path through a course. Final grades are assigned based on how the student decided to complete the "contract". 
  • Ungrading/Collaborative grading: The instructor helps students set and work toward learning goals. Students reflect frequently on their own progress and receive ample feedback from instructor on performance. Students assign their own grades at the end of the semester, sometimes in consultation with instructor, but individual grades are rarely assigned to a student’s work.

Citations

Inoue, Asao B. (2020). Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom, 2nd edition. Clearinghouse.

Koenka, Alison C., Linnenbrink-Garcia, Lisa, Moshontz, Hannah, Atkinson, Kayla M., Sanchez, Carmen E. ,& Harris Cooper. (2021). “A meta-analysis on the impact of grades and comments on academic motivation and achievement: a case for written feedback,” Educational Psychology, 41:7, 922-947, DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2019.1659939

Kohn, Alfie & Blum, Susan. (2020). Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead). WVU Press.

Wiggins, G. (2012). Keys to effective feedback: Advice, evaluation, grades-none of these provide the descriptive information that students need to reach their goals. What is true feedback-and how can it improve learning. Educational Leadership. 70(5), p. 11-16.

Winkelmes, Mary-Ann., Bernacki, M., Butler, J., Zochowski, M., Golanics, J., & Weavil, K. H. (2016). A teaching intervention that increases underserved college students' success. Peer Review, 18(1), 31-36. 

Nilson L. B. & Stanny C. J. (2014). Specifications grading : restoring rigor motivating students and saving faculty time. Stylus Publishing.