2026 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Consistency Matters: Practical Grading Tips for Large Undergraduate Labs

Presented at Assessment, Grading, and Feedback Innovation

Practical considerations of teaching large, undergraduate lab courses often call for the use of instructional teams that work under the supervision of a course director to teach, grade, and otherwise support the success of a class and its students. Grading and feedback are frequently challenging to align within an instructional team of diverse backgrounds. Much of the grading in undergraduate lab courses includes evaluating subjective answers and student writing, a challenging but important skill. Many teaching assistants and new instructors have little experience providing feedback and grades for these types of assessments. This also leads to unique challenges in providing consistent feedback and grades between instructors in the same course.
Our community of engineering lab and design course instructors has found that challenges with consistent and timely grading are a recurring theme in both formal and informal conversations. Both new and experienced course directors bring different challenges forward and exchange ideas for how to address those challenges. Questions that have come up include how to ensure that grading is consistent across sections, how to provide timely feedback, and how to train teaching assistants. We received feedback from students on these courses about inconsistencies in grades, application of course policies, and related support.
In this tips and tricks paper, we will summarize knowledge gained from these discussions so that others may benefit from our community’s work. We will focus on rubrics, team grading calibration activities, grading tools, and alternative grading methods. Each of these areas has had a positive impact on the consistency and timeliness of grading and feedback in our courses. We observed that adopting new tools and practices opens the door for collaborative learning and continuous improvement within instructional teams.

Authors
  1. Dr. Christopher D. Schmitz Orcid 16x16http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9673-9832 University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
  2. Dr. Jessica R TerBush Orcid 16x16http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8438-7411 University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
  3. Katherine Ansell Orcid 16x16http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5823-9506 University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
  4. Elaine C. Schulte University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
  5. David Mussulman University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
  6. Chandrasekhar Radhakrishnan University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign
  7. Siva Nalla Orcid 16x16http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3691-8038 University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
  8. Dr. Rebecca Marie Reck Orcid 16x16http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5894-4130 University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [biography]
Note

The full paper will be available to logged in and registered conference attendees once the conference starts on June 21, 2026, and to all visitors after the conference ends on June 24, 2026