Grading to Promote Learning

Author: Arlene Vinion Dubiel

At the beginning of the semester, I wrote about identifying students’ motivation for learning. In the blog, I mentioned changing my grading system to encourage a learning orientation rather than a task-completion orientation. With the new system, 90% of the final grade is based upon the quality of summative projects and 10% from weekly assignments. Previously, it had been split 50-50, resulting in high grades for students who submitted work, regardless of the quality. 

Throughout this process, I hoped that this change in my grading system would be a positive one for my students. In this post, I'll explain my method, the decisions I made, and whether or not my desired outcome was achieved.

Grading points system

Our institutions dictate overall grading systems, and most of us are required to use the letter grade system. We generally base those letter grades on the percentage of points received. The flexibility of our grading system comes from our distribution of those points. With my new grading system, 900 points come from summative projects aligned with course objectives. The other 100 points come from 1-4 point-value weekly assignments like quizzes, whole class sharing, small group discussion posts, or product creation. Weekly assignments are awarded points if something is submitted, even if it is of poor quality. 

Weekly assignments are evidence of learning that are evaluated formatively. Each one begins with a short statement of purpose – an answer to the perpetual student question of “why am I doing this?” Some assignments have a general purpose of engaging in learning. Some are used to improve the quality of the summative projects by way of feedback. By devaluing the points of weekly assignments and adding a purpose statement, students would hopefully see the value of the work outside of a grade, motivating them to participate and learn rather than check the task-complete box.   

If it’s not graded, they won’t do it

My biggest concern with this new grading scheme is the idea that “if it isn’t graded, students won’t do it.” We often believe that grades are the sole motivation for our students. If there is no grade, then there is no value in doing the work. In a discussion with my preservice secondary math teachers about homework, most of them agreed that homework needed to be graded. However, the purpose of homework is usually for additional practice. If a student needs practice, homework is good. But for the student who doesn’t need the practice to be successful, why should they be penalized? By grading homework with the purpose of practice, we are promoting a task-completion orientation rather than a learning orientation. 

Will students do the work if it has low point value? Overwhelmingly, the answer is “yes.” Some weekly assignments are discussion boards where students engage in the content and share their thoughts. In a remote, asynchronous format, these discussion boards are the best equivalent to in-class participation. Students are given 2-4 points just for participating. Even though the point value was low and the purpose was engagement, there was active and consistent participation by almost all students. One summative project had optional checkpoints (throughout the semester) where a student could receive feedback to improve his/her project. Most submitted checkpoint assignments, despite the absence of a point value. So the idea that “if it’s not graded, students won’t do it” was not accurate in this case.     

Student challenges and choice

I changed my grading system so students who fell behind with participation would not be penalized. These past two semesters, more than any other, were fraught with students’ challenges. There were the Covid illnesses and quarantines, a rough pregnancy with preterm birth, a spouse’s illness, a car accident with injuries (thankfully minor), and more than one student admitting he/she had mental health challenges. All of these students missed weekly assignments. With the past grading system, missing weekly assignments would severely damage the final grade, producing high anxiety for the student. But this time, students who were struggling were encouraged to complete the assignments that would most benefit them in achieving the course objectives. They would miss out on learning or feedback opportunities, but it would not harm their final grade. 

Even students without challenges could choose only to complete the weekly assignments they needed most. For example, a few students were more advanced than others with the skill of writing learning objectives. There were four opportunities to demonstrate mastery of this skill.  A couple of students chose not to submit all assignments because they did not need the practice – with little to no effect on their final grade. The new grading system allowed flexibility with assignment completion without harming the final grade.

Balance in the end

Now, at the end of the semester, I can say that I’m much happier with this new grading system. The focus on project quality rather than participation allowed me to reward the truly excellent projects with high marks (that translated to A’s) for the final grade. Most of those A’s were earned by students who did the weekly assignments and submitted high-quality summative projects. The students with challenges beyond their control were strategic with their weekly assignments and submitted high-quality summative projects with good final grades. A couple of students still chose not to submit weekly assignments and then submitted poor-quality projects. Their motivation was not to learn but to complete the tasks with the highest point values in the hopes of passing. Many of them will pass, but not with high grades. 

My students also seemed happier with this grading system. I received fewer panicked late-night emails over a missed high point value weekly assignment. Instead, students strategically chose what assignments to submit. My student, with a surprise newborn baby, did not have to sweat the small stuff. Instead, she focused on getting support for the projects and achieving the course objectives while still spending time recovering with her family. 

Overall, this new grading system was a success. The final grade was focused on quality and not the quantity of work, and students did the assignments – even the low point value ones. In the future, I hope to shift the balance even further, perhaps having all of the points coming from summative projects. Or maybe even adopt a complete mastery-based system of grading. But I’ll share more on that in future blogs. 

In the meantime, good luck with your own grading!

Changing a course grading system to focus almost entirely on summative projects produced final grades that rewarded quality over participation and effort. As you complete your grading for the academic year, consider whether your course grading system promotes a learning orientation or a task-completion orientation. 

Ready To Jumpstart Your Math Redesign Momentum?

Create effective, equitable & quantifiable change in your math program built on the good work you've already done