Alternative grading methods, such as specifications grading and standards-based grading, are becoming more widely adopted in both K–12 and higher education due to their ability to promote mastery, reduce grading disputes, and cultivate a growth mindset. Unlike traditional points-based grading, these systems emphasize clearly defined standards, actionable feedback, and opportunities for revision without penalty. This approach helps ensure that grades accurately reflect what students can do, rather than how well they navigate a system of partial credit.
While instructors may be intrigued by the philosophy of alternative grading, many are hesitant to commit to a full-course redesign. This paper invites participants to start small by reimagining just one frustrating assignment (e.g., one that is especially time-consuming, produces low-quality student work, and/or often leads to grade complaints). Drawing on the "Four Pillars" of alternative grading (Clark & Talbert), participants will walk through a structured redesign process and leave with a plan to pilot an alternative grading approach on one assignment in their own course.
The authors represent a cross-disciplinary working group of faculty from mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, and physics and chemistry, and have several years of experience implementing and refining alternative grading practices in a range of classroom settings.
Are you a researcher? Would you like to cite this paper? Visit the ASEE document repository at peer.asee.org for more tools and easy citations.