ungrading – Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning

Camosun Story #73: Helen

Helen is a Co-op and Internship Coordinator (CIC) with the Technology programs at Camosun, as well as Chair for Cooperative Education. Helen has been working in post secondary education for most of her career and explained, “I have always been interested in the teaching and learning process, even when I was in administrative or coordination roles. And I am particularly interested in experiential education and reflective learning, or work-integrated learning which is how co-op fits in.”

Part of Helen’s work as a CIC is to teach a Career Development Workplace Preparation Skills course, known as CDEV. “CDEV is a competency-based course teaching students about career development that includes assessing one’s own interests, skills and abilities; understanding the world of work; and connecting with professionals, and opportunities, in industry.” Helen also noted that for her program area, CDEV is a requirement for graduation, meaning that not all students are keen to take it.

Because CDEV is required, Helen sometimes finds teaching it challenging. “Ideologically, I want people to learn, not just finish with a grade. But it’s challenging to engage students meaningfully when they are motivated by the technology aspects of their program and are very busy in their courses.

Most of the assignments in CDEV are not graded – with the exception of the cover letter and resumé, with a requirement of achieving 70% or higher to complete the course. A strong cover letter and resume is the biggest artifact coming out of CDEV for students. After Helen heard about ungrading, she had a conversation with Robin Fast and thought it “might be a solution to some of the tensions I was experiencing” around student engagement and grading that assignment within a pass/fail course. “I love to try out new things, so last fall I decided to scrap the itemized rubric for the cover letter and resumé and made it more qualitative. I still had grades, but used a binary method where One was ‘you’ve met the requirements’ and Zero was ‘you need to keep working on it.’”

Helen anticipated my next question; how did it go? “It’s a work in progress and I need to refine things for next time. What I found is that ungrading didn’t seem to give students enough direction. Part of me thinks I may have removed some incentives by removing the quantitative rubric. When it was clear that the requirement to pass was 70 out of 100, they had incentive to work harder, even though I would tell them not to do it for the grade.”

A piece of ungrading that supported the workplace preparation and student engagement aspects of CDEV was the feedback component, which in ungrading is typically formative and collaborative. “Students need to learn how receive feedback and to be able to adapt based on feedback. While I had always incorporated peer feedback into class activities, I required students to submit their feedback along with their application documents so I could help them be accountable to the feedback they received. And thanks to Robin, I implemented audio feedback for students, which was a way for me to provide personal commentary about their submissions.” One problem she encountered was that while “students were allowed to resubmit their documents as many times as they needed to, many of them seemed to disregard the feedback that was given. It almost seemed that without a grade, feedback did not matter.”

One aspect of ungrading Helen particularly appreciates is the focus it brings to building relationships in the classroom. “I feel that this experience with ungrading enhanced my relationships with students and contributed to a wonderful communal learning experience. In fact, I heard more than once that the peer reviews and the discussions in class and enabled students to better connect with each other if I can get them to talk to the student next to them, that’s a win!”

Helen reminded me that “these students are in a grueling and competitive program, and I like to think that CDEV supports them to excel at a personal level, because CDEV is all about them. I believe if I can boost their confidence through CDEV, that will also be good for their career. And because their success is based on the choices they make, I’d like them to choose to be successful, not be reliant on a grade as a measure of success. That’s why ungrading appeals to me as a principle.”

What is the future of ungrading for Helen? “I’m going to keep it with some refinements. I think when you do something new you should give it more than just one try. Not everyone is comfortable with trying new things and possibly failing, but if something you try works out, then others may be willing to try it out too. In the end, our goals are to help our students succeed in their careers and prepare them for the real world.” And Helen believes many of ungrading aspects, like reflection and collaborative feedback, can support those goals.

Camosun Story #72: Robin and Ungrading

You may remember Robin from such stories as Camosun Story #7 (SO long ago) and Becoming Unravelled: a reflection. Robin is both a faculty member in the Community, Family & Child Studies (CFCS) program as well as an Educational Developer in the Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. A few weeks ago, I sat down with Robin to talk about his journey into ungrading, foreshadowed by his Unravelled post.

“This journey for me began when I started with CETL last year. I facilitated the book club with a book about ungrading already assigned, and then wrote my reflection blog post. But for awhile now I’ve been grappling with how to make sure everything I do aligns with my principles of teaching and learning, and wondering how we can grade students for their efforts when grading is not at all an objective measurement of their learning.”

Robin’s work with the book club clarified that he was not alone in struggling with having to assign grades. “Students are supposed to make mistakes, try things out, and practice” and grading them at every step along the way may not encourage them to continue in that ongoing learning whether that grade is “good” or not. And when Robin read the ungrading book he realized that he had already been doing quite a bit of ungrading. “For example, in the CFCS diploma, we have practicum courses that aren’t graded – those courses are assessed as complete or not complete and the assignments all align with that. Students are expected to meet learning outcomes to a level where they’re ready to practice independently in the community. So, if an assignment doesn’t reflect that ability, we ask them to redo it and explain how they can improve.” But what Robin realized was that the other courses students take were not preparing them for that practicum learning experience, although within those graded courses, Robin was providing assignments that were NOT graded. “For example, if students are doing presentations, they will for the most part receive an A because they are taking a risk by standing up and speaking and you don’t want to discourage them.” But the conversations Robin had in book club helped him realize that ungrading was important for every assignment. As a result, Robin decided to move a class he had taught many times completely into the world of ungrading for the following Fall term.

“The course I ungraded is CFCS 110, Foundations for Practice, and is a first semester course in a two-year diploma program. Melissa (another ungrader) shared some examples of wording she used to describe ungrading to students, and I made some modifications to my course using those examples. I got rid of any of the one and done assignments and made sure all assignments were formative.” Robin noted that ungrading research discusses how ungrading is both positive for students and disruptive, because it is a radical change from how they are used to being assessed. Communicating clearly and regularly with students is, therefore, essential to build their comfort with ungrading. “At the very beginning of the course, I described the ungrading process to students and gave them a document describing the reasons for ungrading, what some of the problems are with grading, and why this could be valuable to their learning. I explained that I would give them regular feedback on their assignments, but they wouldn’t receive a letter grade for their assignments. I also clarified how redoing assignments would work to meet the course expectations.”

Robin chose to provide audio feedback to students so that they could hear his voice explaining clearly what he saw that they were doing well in the assignment, and places that they could improve for the next assignment or for a resubmission if that was needed. “Audio feedback is easy to create, can be more detailed, and supports building a relationship with the learner much better than written feedback.”

Robin also met with students individually right before the midpoint of the course, taking class time to do so. “That took a couple weeks to complete. I intended to meet again with each of them towards the end of the semester, but I did not manage that this time around.” While time consuming, Robin feels this piece of the switch to ungrading is critical, to build trust in the feedback process, and making sure he was always following through with his commitments to them.

Because self-reflection is an important component in ungrading, Robin had his students reflect on their progress at both the midpoint and the end of the course. “When you ask students to assign a letter grade for themselves, you reserve the right to adjust it, which opens the door to a conversation if there’s disagreement.” Robin asks things like: How do you see yourself progressing over the semester? Have you responded to feedback from one assignment for the next? “In my past courses students have often been dragged down by a weak assignment at the beginning of the semester meaning their final grade may not reflect where they’ve come to by the end of the semester. None of that is a factor with the ungrading process because their letter grade is based on how they see themselves progressing and what they’ve learned by the end of the course.”

Whether you use ungrading or not, students need to receive a letter grade, and Robin wondered how students would assess themselves – would they all give themselves an A+? “I came to two conclusions. First was that letter grades, no matter how hard we try, are subjective measures of something, and not necessarily learning, so why am I worried about what grade students are assigning? Second was that research says students are typically harder on themselves with their grades that we are, and I found that was true in many cases, where students assigned themselves a letter grade which was lower than I would have.”

Robin also puzzled over the disconnect between ungrading and having to assign a grade. “If I tell students that the letter grade system is subjective for instructors to assign, how can I expect them to assign themselves a grade? So, I discussed that apparent contradiction with students and provided them with a clear rubric. And I know some ungrading instructors will build that rubric with students, so they have even more of an understanding of what it is that they’re working towards.” Another challenge Robin has with letter grades is how they turn education into something that is ranked. “In real life, after they complete college, students will go to work, get feedback on the work they do, and use that feedback to improve – that’s the way our whole world works. So why don’t we make sure that we’re aligning that with how we’re teaching here?”

Robin was happy with how his first foray into ungrading went. “I received positive feedback from students both during the course and at the end. In fact, I had one student tell me that she felt like she had never learned in school before, but now she felt like she was learning. She could focus on the content and not worry about meeting the instructor’s expectations in order to get the right grade.”

Even beyond improving student learning, Robin found that “the process of reviewing student assignments and giving them feedback was so much more enjoyable and productive than it has been for me in the past. Being able to simply focus in on the feedback, and not have to worry about how my feedback connected with a letter grade, wasn’t only freeing, but it was much better aligned with how I see effective education.” And students were excited to receive his feedback. “Students told me that in the past they have been anxious and worried about looking at their feedback, but now they were looking forward to it so that they could improve their next assignment.”

I asked Robin if he had spoken to any of his colleagues about ungrading. “Colleagues agree with me about the incongruity between letter grades and the work we’re trying to do as instructors. But they wonder: Will students be motivated? Will they be confused by the lack of grading? But the nice thing about ungrading is that there are many ways to implement it.” Although Robin cautions, implementing ungrading is more work for the students. “Students may be redoing an assignment instead of just moving on to the next one and reflecting on their experience and learning process. But I’ve never had such consistent attendance as I had this last semester, probably because the assignments were designed such that students needed to be in the classroom, engaging with the material and each other, in order to successfully complete them.”

I wondered what advice Robin might have for faculty wanting to try out some ungrading. “I’m really privileged because in my program, there are no multiple sections of classes and faculty are all working with the same cohort of students, so we don’t have the pressure for every course section to be similar. But I think there are some guiding principles that are helpful. First, be transparent. Talk with your students about what you’re doing and why, laying it out clearly for them and following through with your commitments to them.” Second, start small. “Try revising one or two assignments to be ungraded rather than your entire course.” And third, consider the time commitment. Set expectations on how often you meet with students and discuss feedback with them, as well as due dates for resubmitted assignment to help you manage your time.

What is the future of ungrading for Robin? “I have a hard time imagining myself not using it in the future. Next time I teach a letter grade course my plan is to ungrade it. If I can do it in a first semester course, I can do it anywhere else in the program. And I will continue to talk with my colleagues about if and where they might want to try ungrading out.” But will he change anything? “Yes. There were quite a few students at the end of the semester who still had to resubmit assignments, so I need to be clearer about the resubmission process to help students stay on track a bit better. And I want to find space for more individual meetings with students.”

In the end, Robin says he was surprised, but gratified, to see the shift in how students responded to assignment feedback. “I didn’t change the way I was giving feedback – audio feedback, focusing on positives – I just removed the grade and thus the pressure on students. The only difference was removing that letter grade.”

Camosun Story #70: Melissa

Melissa is a faculty member who teaches both in the Computer Science and Communications departments at Camosun. I was very interested in talking to Melissa about her foray into ungrading, and she had a fantastic story to share. If you want to learn more about ungrading, see Becoming Unravelled: a reflection from Robin Fast, Educational Developer, CETL.

Melissa is an art school graduate who has her certificate in Applied Design from Kwantlen Polytechnic University, as well as a certificate in Industrial Design from Emily Carr (as well as many other credentials). Her work background is in product design (she designed shoes!) but over time, she sought a career shift into teaching, and in 2014, an opportunity came up at Camosun in the Communications Department and she jumped on board.

In 2015, Melissa embraced the opportunity to complete her Master’s degree in postsecondary curriculum and instruction from Simon Fraser University (SFU), and after its completion, began teaching at the University of Victoria (UVic) in Art Education in addition to teaching at Camosun. During COVID, Melissa experienced a reduced teaching load at Camosun. “I taught Digital Media 125 and 126 until the program was paused.” At UVic, her course load expanded to include Digital Art, Visual Design for Marketing, Advocacy and Persuasion and Design Thinking, which she found “was very much in alignment of everything I do.”

While teaching Design Thinking at UVic, Melissa really began to face challenges when grading a creative course. “Students would ask why I didn’t like their work or why they didn’t get an A, and I explained it was nothing to do with me not liking the work. We were looking at foundational skills, how we develop creativity, and how to marry it with the right technologies to get an outcome that addresses our client needs. There’s always been friction between the creative work and having to fit it in a rubric because creativity cannot be contained in a box. But students have to get a grade, so how can we find a way to understand how grading is going to happen?”

Then, fast forward to last year when Melissa applied to teach a Computer Science course in Design Thinking at Camosun. “Not in Art Education, but for computer science students, but still very much like my UVic course – trying to fit something organic and process-based into the confines of 13 weeks with a grade at the end.” Melissa already knew that there was going to be a friction with grades, but as she began to puzzle through how to address this, some of her colleagues told her about Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and what to do instead) by Susan Blum. “Then after I read Robin Fast’s piece on ungrading I read the book. I couldn’t put it down – they were speaking my language.” Melissa also reflected on one of her SFU courses which was ungraded. “Experiencing that course was absolute freedom and marked a shift where I understood that the work I was doing in education was actually a creative pursuit. And discovering that alignment shifted my whole perspective on education.” Now Melissa began to see a way through her grading conundrum. “I spent my Scheduled Development putting together the design thinking class and setting it up as an ungraded course.”

Taking her guidance from all her reading, Melissa opted for what is known as a Zero, One, Two ungrading system. “Zero means the student work does not meet any of the outcomes, work given a One meets most outcomes, and Two meets all outcomes. But every assignment also has a reflection and feedback component.” Melissa wrote out her reasoning for her students to help them understand what she was doing and to address questions they might have, telling them she was considering where they would land after college because “in industry, you’re not going to be graded for anything.” But it was also about process design. “Thinking is about process, and you need to be wildly creative and stand behind your ideas. You have to fail and fail often to be successful, so grading a failure doesn’t work.” And after talking this through with her students, they were onboard and ready to try it.

Students also had the opportunity to engage in peer review and feedback, and needed to recognize the value of that feedback so it wasn’t just “good job.” “I sat down with each student twice during the term (once at mid-term and once at the end) as part of their self-assessment. I explained that I had to give a grade and wanted to know where they saw themselves. I was surprised that most of my students graded themselves with the same grade I would have given them.”

During those meetings, Melissa heard a lot about the student experience she would not have heard any other way. Some of the things students said:

Students noted how ungrading shifted how they applied skills in other classes.
Students learned not to overestimate their skill sets (recognizing they still have questions to ask and things to learn.)
If students put less time into the course because of competing priorities, they graded themselves lower as a reflection of that.
Students took ownership of their work, defending their work and did not ask Melissa what she wanted to see. They defended their work because they knew that that was encouraged.
Students felt that they were free to do things over and over again, which is what you do in design and in industry. It’s never a one and done – rarely do you finalize an outcome the first time around.

In addition to students seeing the value of ungrading, Melissa also found relief from the stress of grading work. “There was a freedom that I didn’t have to assign a letter grade to something, that I could leave it at a Zero, One, and Two. And since I always write feedback, it wasn’t like I had an extra load – it was just different.” Melissa discovered that we can do assessments differently. “At the end of the day, it’s not my experience, it’s their experience that is important. I was not the teacher, but worked shoulder to shoulder with my students, and they leaned on everybody for feedback, just like it happens out in industry.”

After so many positive outcomes, Melissa is ready to ungrade again. “Next, I’ll be teaching a user interface [and user experience] course in computer science, with the same students I’ve already taught. This course also relies on empathy, where we’re thinking about other people and their experiences, and if we can ask reflective questions of ourselves, we can ask better questions of our users.” As for revising the courses she has already ungraded, she said “I would still have the two meetings with students mid-term and at the end. I don’t know how I could fit in more, but I found those meetings to be important to giving students space to talk about what they need.” But Melissa wants to explore how D2L can support more flexibility in how it presents grades and feedback to students to reduce confusion and keep things aligned with her ungrading.

Melissa also asked her Computer Concepts course students how they might envision that course as being ungraded. “I asked them what they would like to see and how we could make a course that isn’t particularly creative more engaging. Having the students chime in on that, even though they won’t be able to experience it, was valuable and if I teach that course again I will spend time reworking it into an ungrading format.”

I was curious if Melissa has talked with colleagues about her ungrading, and she noted that she and her fellow computer science instructors have had some very fruitful conversations about pedagogy. “We need to talk about different ways of doing things and the challenges we face trying new things. And because we are teaching the same students it was interesting to compare experiences and connect them back to pedagogy.

Melissa wrapped up our conversation by saying “ungrading had been rolling around in my head for a while, but I wasn’t ready to try it. But this year after talking to colleagues and reading Robin’s post, I finally felt safe and confident to give it a shot. Because it’s been so positive, I am willing to try again and do even better next time. And to my Camosun colleagues, those I’ve met and those I haven’t met, if you’re thinking about trying something new like ungrading, just give it a try!”

Becoming Unravelled: a reflection from Robin Fast, Educational Developer, CETL

This winter, Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) Book Club participants read Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead).

I can’t emphasise this enough: Do not read this book! It will have you tugging at a thread that unravels an entire sock drawer full of sacred bits of teaching practice. It may lead you to re-examine what you value about the letter grade system, your choice of assignments, your assessment and feedback processes, your relationship with students, and maybe even your feelings about the Roadrunner and Wile E. Coyote!

The text describes ungrading as the practice of providing no letter grades or marks on student work, focusing instead on an iterative and formative process of feedback in an effort to improve student engagement and learning. And if you think this can’t be done in a letter-grade-centred postsecondary environment, they offer examples that undermine this assumption.

Susan D. Blum, the book’s editor, as well as the chapter authors, make a strong case that letter grades are an invention that needs to be chucked. According to the authors, letter grades don’t correlate to later competence in practice, are a shortcut that doesn’t acknowledge the complexity that is the learning process, discourage risk (a key learning ingredient) because students instead focus on meeting the extrinsic expectations of the evaluator, and put instructors and institutions in the business of ranking students rather than encouraging learning.

As I read, I certainly didn’t like the accusatory finger pointing my way. I had to admit, however, I have myself at times, both as an instructor and a student just tried to get through by taking the most expedient, expected route.

I remember when I first started teaching, picking up the threads left by previous course instructors and learning the ropes from my new colleagues, I accepted that I had to grade, and I worked to find ways to make it meaningful, helpful, and accurate. I remember, less fondly, the first time I was asked that heartwarming question, “Why did you take these marks off?” Much of the feedback I provided students was motivated by justifying the grade I was assigning and trying to prevent that question from coming my way again. I spent my weekends diligently providing that feedback only to realize how frequently, when accompanied by a grade, it wasn’t even read.

As a student, how often did I spend time trying to figure out the instructor’s system, often seemingly chosen at random, rather than based on what I wanted to get out of a course? How often did the stress of the needed grade override my original reasons for signing up for a class? How many times did I choose safe and within-the-lines over something inventive and more fulfilling because there may be a consequence I hadn’t anticipated? This book has reminded me that education needs to prepare learners for the autonomy of a less structured world, where creativity, self-direction, and a growth mindset will be key elements of success. Education also built on relationships – between students and between students and instructors – and this is hardly nurtured by the looming judgment in a grade.

I’ve been reminded that we need to encourage mistakes and I’ve been working in a structure where mistakes are punished.

Ungrading offers an alternative and since the examples in the book include continuing to assign a grade at the end of the semester, many of the suggestions are things I can implement within our existing structures, perhaps starting small with a few ungraded assignments to make the change manageable as I try to weave together something new, something more cooperative, more learning centred.

Focusing on Formative Feedback

In Ungrading, the authors suggested assignments that build on each other, and the use of clear, supportive feedback that students can use to improve their work. Students are offered the opportunity to resubmit assignments or use the feedback for their next assignment without the risk of losing a mark: no ‘one and done’ assignments. Students and instructors work together, encouraging risk and growth, to improve performance and deepen learning. The process rather than the product becomes the focus.

The authors also emphasized the value of peer, self, and instructor feedback, and creating a clear structure so that students are able to support each other and are guided to reflect effectively on their own progress. Evidence suggests that feedback alone is more effective in improving performance than feedback with a grade, or than grades alone. With only the feedback to consider, students may build on their skills with a greater intrinsic sense of motivation.

One suggestion I found particularly useful was to ask students to let the instructor know, when submitting an assignment, what they were trying to accomplish or improve, and then targeting feedback to address the student’s specific goals.

Portfolios

In addition to formative, collaborative, and targeted feedback, many authors encouraged students to create portfolios of their work, usually electronic, that they could add to over the course of the semester or longer. Portfolios become a metacognition space and a way to share their work with peers and instructors, building evidence of their learning, and forming the basis for discussions between students and with the instructor during and at the end of the term.

Assigning the Grade

In order to fulfill the grade requirement within which the authors worked, most met with students at the end of the semester to discuss the grade together, usually having the student suggest a grade and provide evidence to justify their choice. Along with the growth demonstrated through their response to feedback throughout the semester, instructors used a variety of assignments that the student could draw from as evidence, including weekly attendance, blog posts, peer-led course units, discussions, presentations, and essays, to name a few. Badging and creating checklists for students to monitor their own progress were also used. Some instructors also described a contract-grading process in which students completed a contracted number of assignments to a specific quality in order to receive a corresponding grade.

If you’re concerned a student will receive a grade they haven’t earned, as Marcus Schultz-Bergin, one of the contributing authors, suggested, then you are still attached to the idea that grades have meaning. Evidence demonstrates that they don’t, and this may be the most compelling reason to ensure students are a part of the process.

Getting Buy-In

Whenever I’ve tried something new in class, I’ve talked with students about the what, the why, and the how. I’ve found that when students understand what is in store, they can ready themselves, make decisions about how they want to participate, recognize themselves as part of the environment and process we are creating together, and engage more fully in the work. Since instructors expect to grade and students expect to be graded, messing with this equation means even more discussion than may be necessary with other, less disruptive changes.

In addition to describing to students the ungrading process, the reasons it is being used, and what students can expect along the way, some authors, where possible or working in environments where this was unfixed, built the syllabus with the class, creating learning outcomes and rubrics together. This approach seems to be a helpful way to demonstrate the ungrading philosophy, by collaborating on some of the foundational elements of the course from the beginning. Referencing the personal meaning that Dewey long ago insisted was essential to learning, some authors also encouraged students to add their own learning outcomes, relevant to them, and to include completing these outcomes as part of their work and portfolio plans.

Results

In the book-club discussions, many of the strategies for assessing learning were similar to those many of us are already including in our courses. The big difference was the lack of letter grades or marks. While some of the approaches described seemed overly elaborate, and assigning a grade at the end of the course appears to compromise the ungrading philosophy promoted in the book, we agreed that the values expressed aligned with our own commitment to an engaged, accessible, and socially just pedagogy. The authors consistently described the positive results, including more egalitarian, cooperative environments and relationships, as well as strong student learning outcomes. They described students who worked harder, had less stress, new learning habits, and more creativity. They described students who had loved learning but hated school, appreciating this one experience where they could love both.

In addition, the instructors were reenergized by their role in education, letting go of the sorting, ranking, and judging and focusing instead on coaching, encouraging, guiding and the socially-just act of teaching.

Ignoring My Advice

If you decide to ignore my advice and pick up this book to begin the unraveling, and continue, as one of the book’s author’s put it, that Wile E. Coyote-level, impossible yet noble pursuit – the perfect teaching and learning experience- please let me know what you decide to adopt and how it goes.

Additional resources can be found with any of us at CETL and:

Camosun’s Assessment LibGuide (Including the use of feedback).

The Reflective Learning Framework: A Guide for Students and Educators.

UNGRADING: Untangling Grades from Feedback

E-portfolio Resources