{"title":"Demystifying Alternative Grading Systems","authors":"F. Moosvi, Giulia Toti, E. Baniassad","doi":"10.1145/3593342.3593358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many instructors want their students to focus on learning instead of grades. However, our systems, structures, and policies are heavily centred around grades and the fallacies of their inherent fairness. In these settings, it is hard to expect students to keep their attention on the material and not get distracted by the frequent input of various grades. Alternatives to traditional grading, such as standards or competency-based grading, specifications-based grading, and ungrading, allow instructors to change the conversation and redirect the focus on learning. In this interactive panel, we will begin with a description of some of the most common alternative grading practices: standards, specifications, competency, contract, portfolio, labour, and ungrading. Then, the panellists will share their experiences on adopting these alternative grading systems in courses with some implementation details. Attendees will have plenty of opportunities to ask questions and panellists will also share their experiences on how we refocused students’ attention on rich, high-quality feedback instead of grades. We will also discuss the challenges and opportunities of these systems, and facilitate a discussion on how we can start working on broader structural changes to recentre higher education on learning, rather than points and grades. The primary goal of this session is to examine different forms of alternative grading practices that inform formative and summative assessments, which in turn impact students’ motivation, self-efficacy and course success.","PeriodicalId":378747,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 25th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 25th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3593342.3593358","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Many instructors want their students to focus on learning instead of grades. However, our systems, structures, and policies are heavily centred around grades and the fallacies of their inherent fairness. In these settings, it is hard to expect students to keep their attention on the material and not get distracted by the frequent input of various grades. Alternatives to traditional grading, such as standards or competency-based grading, specifications-based grading, and ungrading, allow instructors to change the conversation and redirect the focus on learning. In this interactive panel, we will begin with a description of some of the most common alternative grading practices: standards, specifications, competency, contract, portfolio, labour, and ungrading. Then, the panellists will share their experiences on adopting these alternative grading systems in courses with some implementation details. Attendees will have plenty of opportunities to ask questions and panellists will also share their experiences on how we refocused students’ attention on rich, high-quality feedback instead of grades. We will also discuss the challenges and opportunities of these systems, and facilitate a discussion on how we can start working on broader structural changes to recentre higher education on learning, rather than points and grades. The primary goal of this session is to examine different forms of alternative grading practices that inform formative and summative assessments, which in turn impact students’ motivation, self-efficacy and course success.