Rethinking Grades: Preparing Social Workers for Practice, Not Just Papers
Catch the vision of how a whole program can adopt alternative grading
Jeanette Harder is the Master of Social Work (MSW) program director and a social work professor for the Bluffton University and Goshen College collaborative MSW program. The program prepares students for specialized practice in mental health with an emphasis on anti-racism and anti-oppressive practices, and integration of spirituality. Feel free to reach out to her at jharder2@goshen.edu.
What if grades genuinely reflected readiness for a career, not just academic achievement? For too long, traditional education has focused on taking exams and writing papers, leaving students ill-equipped for the collaborative, dynamic demands of professional life. When I was given the incredible opportunity to design a Master of Social Work (MSW) program from the ground up, I knew we had to break that mold.
Our MSW program is a collaborative effort between Goshen College and Bluffton University , two small, faith-based institutions. Delivered 100% online with a flipped classroom model, we've just completed our second year, and are on track for initial accreditation in 2026.
We currently have 60 students and four full-time faculty members and are poised for continued growth. MSW students range in age from 23 to 63 years old, and are highly motivated to learn social work content, perform well, and complete MSW degree requirements. While some students arrive in our program right out of their undergraduate education, others bring 10, 20, even 30 years of work experience.
Our program is structured around accreditation standards which includes mapping our curriculum to nine competencies. Our emphasis on learning over grading is in line with social work accreditation and institutional requirements in providing high quality and accessible education.
The beauty of building an academic program from scratch is the ability to cultivate a unique culture and curriculum without the typical resistance to change. It allows us to leap straight into the invigorating challenge of creating something truly innovative and meaningful.
Our goal is clear: Prepare students for social work practice. I initially immersed myself in conversations with professional social workers, asking not just "what do you do?" but, more importantly, "what do you expect new MSWs to know and do?" Their answer was unanimous and mirrored my past experience as a social work employer: They want new hires who can engage in a wide variety of client-centered activities, collaborate seamlessly with colleagues and community partners, and actively seek and integrate supervisory feedback. Noticeably absent from their wish list? Employees who can write academic papers, focus on individual performance, and work in isolation.
The stark contrast between traditional academic metrics and real-world demands sparked my quest to build an MSW program that radically prepares students for practice. We urge students to focus on learning, to follow their passions and curiosity, and to take risks on learning new content and engaging in new activities. Assignments are designed to mimic what an MSW professional does in practice such as treatment planning, clinical documentation, program design and monitoring, grant writing, speaking to policymakers, and finding evidence to inform practice. Our students will engage in a variety of meaningful careers that include counseling children and families, advocating for immigrants and refugees, designing programs for homeless veterans, and responding to sexual abuse and human trafficking survivors. Adopting an alternative grading approach is at the heart of preparing students for effective social work practice.
What we do
We grasped the unique opportunity to build our entire MSW program using an alternative grading approach. Using standards- and labor-based approaches to grading in all courses, students prepare “must-do” and “can-do” assignments which instructors grade using a scale of exceeds (E) or meets (M) expectations, revisions are needed (R), or not yet assessable (N). To ease cognitive load for students and provide consistency, syllabi, assignments, grading practices, and learning management sites follow consistent templates in all courses.
Must-do assignments are required and demonstrate students’ social work knowledge and skills to meet course learning outcomes. For example, a must-do assignment in a social work evaluation course asks students to complete a literature review, logic model, and an evaluation proposal. In a clinical intervention course, students complete a must-do assignment entitled, “Framework discovery,” featuring students practicing therapeutic skills in small groups and providing a written reflection on their understanding and skills.
Students submit first versions of must-do assignments which afford them opportunities to apply new knowledge and skills without penalty for missing the mark on their first try. Students enter the MSW program with a wide range of preparedness–some are able to complete assignments with just one or two versions while others take a more circuitous route. Instructors provide rich feedback on students’ first versions of must-do assignments. Students’ performance anxiety is reduced, especially related to written communications, as they come to understand that multiple versions of assignments are invited and that early versions of assignments are not graded.
Instructors assess assignments on an EMRN scale. Students must receive an M for the assignment to be considered “completed.” Descriptors for the EMRN rubric are show below1:
Exceeds expectations (E): Information provided is complete and goes above and beyond what is expected. Mastery of the concepts is evident. There are no nontrivial errors. This work could be used as a classroom example.
Meets expectations (M): Information provided is adequate. Some revision or expansion could be done, but no significant gaps or errors are present. Additional instruction is not needed.
Revision needed (R): Information provided is not yet adequate. Needs further work. Additional instruction is needed.
Not yet assessable (N): Not enough information is present to determine adequacy. The work is absent, fragmentary, or contains significant omissions. Additional instruction is needed.
Students have the option to complete “can-do” assignments to deepen their learning and increase their course grade. Like must-do assignments, can-do assignments are in line with course learning outcomes. They offer students the opportunity to dig deeper into subject areas that are of interest to them. Instructors offer an array of can-do assignments, many of which involve application, inviting students to venture out into their communities to extend their learning within the boundaries of the course.
Examples of can-do assignments include interviewing a social worker in practice or touring a mental health facility, presenting an assignment to a nonprofit organization, and participating in advocacy days at the state capitol. Students complete the activity and write a critical reflection relating the activity to the course and citing course materials. Unlike must-do assignments, students do not create first and final versions or process notes (see below) for can-do assignments.
All courses in our MSW program use the same grading approach. The following language is used in all course syllabi in our MSW program:
Students who complete “must-do” assignments at the E or M level and do not complete any “can-do” assignments will receive a course grade of B. Students’ course grades are lowered one letter grade (e.g., from a B to a C) for each “must-do” assignment that does not reach the E or M level by the due date for the final version.
Each “can-do” assignment completed at the E or M level raises students’ grades one step; e.g. from a B to a B+. “Can-do” assignments only contribute to students’ final course grades if they have reached the E or M level for all “must-do” assignments.
In social work practice, we seek, receive, and offer feedback to others. In our MSW program, assignments encourage students to seek dialogue with instructors, classmates, and mentors. The practice of showing others one’s work is unfamiliar and often uncomfortable for many students. The expectation to receive feedback from others is a practice that can start in the MSW program and continue into practice. The experience of offering strengths-based feedback to other students is good preparation for MSW students’ providing supervision when on the job.
Students seek and incorporate feedback from instructors, classmates, and/or social work mentors as they complete must-do assignments. We provide a brief form for students to use in documenting feedback, called process notes, which includes space for the reviewer to note strengths and areas for feedback. Students consider counsel they receive and revise their assignments as they see fit; they provide a brief response to the feedback received by responding to these prompts:
I especially appreciate feedback from ___ about ___:
I hadn’t previously understood, known, or thought about:
Here is a summary of work, learning, or thinking I’ve done and changes I’ve made:
Upon submission of final versions of must-do assignments, students are invited to provide these process notes which give the instructor a glimpse into students’ learning journeys. Students can also complete a “final” process note for their instructors with these prompts.
What I learned about social work practice through preparing this assignment:
Aspect(s) of this assignment that were most interesting for me:
Aspect(s) of this assignment that were most difficult or frustrating for me:
This would have made this assignment a better learning experience for me:
Students turn in this final process note after grading has been completed, if they wish. This final process note offers vital feedback on how instructors may improve the assignment and instructions for next time. Process notes are voluntary. Process notes contribute to an instructor assigning “exceeds expectations” to a student’s assignment as it lends testament to professional behaviors such as seeking and incorporating feedback which are desired in social work practice.
As illustrated above, the curriculum, assignments, and teaching practices in our MSW program focus on student learning in creative, innovative, and equitable ways. Within the parameters of the semester, deadlines and grading are deemphasized and student learning is prioritized. Released from the burden of assigning grades to work that is not yet well-formed, instructors offer coaching and feedback in ways that are life-giving to both them and their students.
How is it going?
Overall, it’s going really well. We continue to tweak this approach as our program grows and matures. Students and instructors alike express appreciation for this learning and assessment approach which mimics social work practice and does not penalize growth and risk-taking.
Student responses. Students are enthused about this approach to learning and grading, especially those who have struggled in school in the past or have a lot of anxiety around doing well in school. The practice of submitting first versions of assignments without the pressure of it being graded is welcomed by students. They work very hard on their first versions, welcome and incorporate feedback from instructors, and turn in final versions that are high quality.
Sometimes students’ first versions are partially or poorly prepared. We ask students to do the best they can within the constraints of their understanding of the course content or whatever is going on for them. Even if their work is fragmentary, it gives us the opportunity to offer them guidance and encouragement.
If students don’t turn in a first version at all, they waive the opportunity for the instructor’s written feedback. The quality of these students’ final versions is typically low which negatively affects students’ learning and course grade. These students usually turn in first versions on future assignments.
Since our approach to teaching and grading is novel, some students have difficulty grasping how we determine course grades. Therefore, we communicate our grading approach to students in multiple ways and at multiple times. We put it in writing, we speak it, and we post videos about it. We talk about it in new student orientation, course syllabi, Zoom classes, and academic advising.
Our institution asks us to keep our gradebooks up-to-date in Moodle, our learning management system. However, Moodle does not accommodate our grading approach. Therefore, we primarily use Moodle to track assignment versions and feedback, and at the end of each course, we email a table like the one below to each student to summarize how their course grade was determined.
Some students are not pleased that their course grade is not higher if they receive “exceeds expectations” on an assignment compared to "meets expectations." While we reinforce that our focus is on profound learning and skill mastery, not on competing for grades, our response still falls somewhat flat. We are currently exploring ways to reward students’ excellent work without having to resort to points.
Instructor responses. Instructors respond enthusiastically to this approach to teaching and grading, and preparing students for social work careers. They value the opportunity to invest in authentic discussions with their students about things that matter rather than in negotiation of a higher grade. They embrace meeting students where they are at and moving them forward toward meeting course learning outcomes in individualized ways that are characterized by genuine learning and respect rather than defensiveness.
Our assessment and grading practices are new to instructors. We present and reinforce our approach through coaching by the program director, a written teaching handbook, reading, discussion in faculty meetings, and continuing education.
As a new program, we’ve been able to talk with potential instructors during the hiring process about their openness to this approach. We have found it takes considerable time to onboard and assist new instructors in using this approach. We offer flexibility for instructors to contour their particular course content to the delivery of content and creation of assignments.
Conclusion
Constant fine-tuning of our grading approach is necessary, especially as contexts, curricula, and accreditation and institutional expectations shift. We anticipate continued adaptation as our program grows. While creating a new program from scratch is a rare opportunity, the principles behind our alternative grading approach—prioritizing genuine learning, professional feedback, and real-world application—can inspire educators across disciplines. Imagine the impact if more programs focused on preparing students for what they'll actually do in their careers.
This rubric is adapted from the EMRN rubric found at Robert Talbert’s website (https://rtalbert.org/emrn/) which is itself a modification of the EMRF rubric originally written by Rodney Stutzman and Kim Race. Some changes to the specific language of each level of the rubric were made. The EMRN rubric and the language and image from Robert’s website, as well as our modification of that rubric, are licensed under a Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/.
 | A guest post by
|