“Ungrading” A Communication Course Using Feedback, Critical Reflections, and a Portfolio
Lecturer
Learning Outcomes
Context
This course fulfills the written expression requirement for the Dyson Grand Challenges Curriculum, which focuses on applying business principles to address sustainable development issues. By the time students enroll in AEM 2818, they have at least completed two prior college-level writing classes. However, they often still come into this class with some apprehension about writing, sharing their ideas, and being judged by others.
Students are evaluated based on their effort (how thoughtfully and consistently they participate in course activities), and their growth (how they reflect on and revise their work to become more persuasive communicators).
At the end of the semester, students submit a portfolio showcasing their best work. As part of the portfolio, they must explain how they met the learning outcomes, addressed feedback, and will continue to develop their communication skills. A crucial piece of this assessment method is that there are no assessment-level (letter or numeric) grades. Instead, students received feedback on all writing assignments using a holistic rubric (Table 1). Stewart-Harris wants his students to shift their focus from "getting an A" to valuing the learning process and improving as effective communicators.
| Criteria | Proficient | Emerging |
|---|---|---|
Audience Analysis/Rhetorical Awareness
| Written for a specific audience Aware of what the audience finds credible, interesting, and relevant Uses appropriate tone and language Builds connection with the reader | Does not focus on a specific audience Selects some information that might appeal to a broad audience |
Assessments
Stewart-Harris evaluates students based on their in-class participation, writing assignments, and portfolio (Table 2). All parts are weighted equally to show how much the writing process matters. For in-class participation, Stewart-Harris uses a rubric to communicate his expectations (Table 3). By the halfway point in the semester, students also schedule a check-in meeting with the instructor or a graduate teaching assistant to ensure they are on track to achieve the learning outcomes.
| Assessment Category | Description | Grade % |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance, Course Contribution, and Homework | Participating in class discussions, activities, lectures, and writing conferences. | 33 |
| Writing Projects (4) & Revisions | Completing assignments that achieve the guidelines and learning outcomes. | 34 |
| Final Portfolio | Reflecting on growth over the semester and demonstrating mastery of the course learning outcomes. | 33 |
After receiving feedback for each project, students have two weeks to revise and resubmit their work, except for the first assignment, which can only be revised at the end of the semester as part of the final portfolio. Students must first inform Stewart-Harris or the graduate teaching assistants to initiate the revision process for other assignments. Then, they resubmit the revision as often as needed within the specified window. Each revision includes feedback from peers (as annotations on the original draft), the specific changes made, and a written evaluation of the new draft.
| Category | Exceptional | Poor |
|---|---|---|
Attendance | 25 classes attended | 22 classes attended |
Tardiness | 3 tardies or less | 6 tardies or more |
Peer Review | All peer review activities completed | 1 peer review activity completed |
Homework | 95% met all the criteria and were submitted on time | 80% were submitted on time |
Discussion | Participated in 90% of discussions | Participated in 75% of discussions |
Group Work | Active participation in group activities | Minimal participation in group activities |
The portfolio is due at the end of the semester. In it, students reflect on what they learned and assess their strengths and weaknesses in the course. While they are required to revise the first and last writing projects, they can choose to submit another revision of any writing project. Without the portfolio, the highest grade possible in the course is a C-.
Challenges
Students often find self-assessments challenging, especially if it is their first experience with them. This system requires more from students; they need to stay on top of the work, and it is harder to take shortcuts. Also, because there are no explicit grades, students may misread the situation, fall behind, and try to catch up in the last two weeks of class.
Grade inflation is almost inevitable for two different reasons, but in this assessment system, this result is not necessarily a bad outcome. Initially, grades might be high as instructors fine-tune assignments, rubrics, and student feedback. However, high grades may persist long after this stage. When assessments and grading methods are transparent, students who want higher grades will know what to do to earn them. Stewart-Harris finds that the students who get good grades submit high-quality work. Finally, while the attendance and course contribution rubric (Table 3) is helpful for Stewart-Harris and his students, it is still hard to keep track of all the students, their assignments, and their revisions in real-time.