Inside some University of California academic departments and colleges, an atypical idea is gaining steam: deemphasizing, or even ditching, the A-F grading system and rethinking how to assess student learning.
Divisions like UC Berkeley’s College of Chemistry and UC Davis’s Department of Mathematics are deliberating whether to change how they grade students. In some cases, that means awarding students a pass or no-pass grade rather than a letter grade. Other times, it may mean allowing students to choose which assignments get the most weight in determining their grade.
At UC Irvine, Academic Senate leaders are currently evaluating long-term options around grading and have met with officials at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where students don’t receive letter grades for their first semester, to learn about that university’s approach.
Departments at other UC campuses also are experimenting with making changes to how they test students, putting less emphasis on high-stakes exams, because some students aren’t good test-takers but can demonstrate their understanding of the material in other ways. Some departments have begun using two-stage exams: Students take a standard individual exam before also taking a group test where they work with other students.
The changes are especially being considered for first-year students to give them more time to get used to the rigors of college work and learn the material over the course of a semester rather than discourage them early on with low scores on tests and other assignments.
All the possibilities are a welcome development to Jody Greene, the associate vice provost of teaching and learning at UC Santa Cruz, who argues that letter grades aren’t necessarily indicative of whether a student has mastered the material.
Often, Greene said, what grades really measure is the student’s preparation to do college work. That could stem from the availability of rigorous courses in that student’s high school, such as Advanced Placement classes.
A recent UC Board of Regents memo noted that a student from an under-resourced high school “may perform poorly on initial assignments.” As they learn the material over the course of the term, the student may ultimately ace the final exam yet still end up with a below average grade because of those early assignments.
Greene is among some teaching staff across UC who have long advocated for changes to grading, but the pandemic has accelerated the willingness of many faculty members to get on board with those ideas, she said. According to the regents memo, faculty sensitivity to inequities in their students’ educational experiences “was heightened” during the pandemic, ramping up efforts across UC to improve grading and assessment, though officials acknowledge there’s no consensus across the system of the best approach.
“We will be better institutions for this,” said Greene, who is also the founding director of UC Santa Cruz’s Center for Innovations in Teaching and Learning. “The changes that were happening in higher education at a glacial pace were put on a bullet train by COVID, and as painful as the last couple of years have been, we’re now having genuine conversations about how we can better serve the students.”
The shift to reconsider how best to teach and assess students was a natural one for many faculty members amid the pandemic, said Rachel Kennison, executive director of UCLA’s Center for Education Innovation and Learning in the Sciences. Once classes moved online, faculty had to think of new ways to engage students and couldn’t rely on traditional methods for assessing them, such as in-person, closed-book exams.
That was key because often, students who struggle in their first year of college to achieve high grades are discouraged and leave their majors. The problem is especially acute in STEM fields, and particularly among Black and Latino students when they take so-called weed-out classes, difficult courses like chemistry or calculus that often determine whether a student sticks with their major.
MIT's approach
One college, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has found a system that may serve as a model for UC campuses. That university uses what Ian Waitz, MIT’s vice chancellor of undergraduate and graduate education, calls “ramp-up grading” for first-year students.
For every class MIT students take their first semester, either they receive a passing grade or the course doesn’t show up on their transcript at all. In the second semester, they either get a letter grade of A, B or C or, if they earn a D or F, the class doesn’t appear on their transcript. By year two, students receive a standard A-F grade for most classes. That system for first-year grading has been in place at MIT since 2000.
“We’re gradually getting people acclimated, and they’re calibrating themselves to what it takes to succeed with our very rigorous academics,” Waitz said. That style of grading is valuable to students, who also are going through a massive life change as they start college. It’s a difficult transition for many students who are living away from home for the first time and need time to adjust.
