2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

In preparation for teaching a sophomore-level biomechanics course, I reflected on the traditional grading I had used since 2007. I explored alternative grading, diving into the blog “Grading for Growth” (Clark and Talbert) and the book by the same title (Clark and Talbert 2023), Grading for Equity (Feldman 2019) and UNgrading (Blum 2020). Through this exploration, I felt that I could no longer in good conscience assess my students’ learning through traditional grading. Traditional grading has been shown to be biased against students with a weaker educational background which impacts underrepresented groups or students with learning disabilities (Feldman 2019). Feldman states that traditional grading is “oriented towards failure and yields inaccurate scores, but also disproportionately harms students who have intermittent, catastrophic failures – something historically underserved groups are more likely to experience.” As I considered a proficiency-based grading system, I reflected on the following questions, “What is the true goal of learning? Is it to demonstrate proficiency at a singular point in time or by the end of the term?” Ultimately, I want my students to be able to demonstrate proficiency in the course learning goals by the end of the term.

Methods:
In preparing the syllabus, I considered the core skills that are developed in the course that subsequent courses build upon. This led to the development of 14 learning goals. I included problem sets and problem seminars in the overall course grade. I used a 3-level scale to assess proficiency; In Progress (IP) meaning there were conceptual errors and this skill is developing, Proficiency (P) meaning there is fundamental understanding of the goal with a very minor error, Above Proficient (AP) meaning the work was free of all errors.

I changed the language for homework, quizzes, and exams to help my students view the work as separate from traditional grading. I used a soccer analogy; homeworks became “trainings,” quizzes became “skills drills,” and exams became “match day” with the final being “Boxing Day match day.” Students earned a grade through scoring learning goals and earning a P/AP on trainings and problem seminars. I drew inspiration for my grading from a blog post on “Grading for Growth” titled “How to make and use grade trackers.”

I created a grade tracker that included the trainings, learning goals, and problem seminars. Students start at a D level and check off boxes when they earn a P or AP on a training, P or AP on a learning goal twice, and P or AP on a problem seminar. Corrections were allowed on trainings and problem seminars. For learning goals, students had to earn P/AP twice demonstrating sustained understanding of a concept. Learning goals were assessed on skills drills and match days, appearing multiple times throughout the course providing multiple opportunities to score learning goals. This method enables students to learn at their pace while still building complexity.

Results:

I first implemented an alternative grading system in the fall 2023 with 33 students. At the end of the term, I sent an anonymous survey to students asking questions about the grading system (exempt from review by the Human Subjects Review Committee at Union College as per 45 CFR 46.104(d)(1)). I had a response rate of 50%. Of those that responded, when asked “Do you feel that this method of proficiency grading enabled you to focus on learning the course material?” 14 students responded “yes,” one “maybe,” and one “no.” The results were overwhelmingly positive with comments such as “I thought this was awesome. Very low stress learning environment which encouraged just trying the problem to the best of your ability and learning from your mistakes. I felt I learned a lot through the proficiency grading and gained a lot of confidence as a learner.”

Conclusions:
The grade distribution in this course was predominately in the B to A range. Only two students earned an A in the course which I felt didn’t accurately reflect their understanding of the material. This was due to corrections on skills drills and match days which enabled them to raise their grade; however, their understanding was not demonstrated on in-class assessments.

I reflected on the course and adjusted the levels to achieve an A, A-, B+, B, etc. as well as the learning goals. This is a constant feedback loop. I am pleased with the effect it is having on my students' confidence in trying, making mistakes, learning from those mistakes, and trying again. Afterall, isn’t that what learning is all about?