Sociology Compels Alternative Grading

Reflecting on Power and Privilege in the Classroom

The Ames Estate, Stonehill’s first building. Used under CC-BY-SA 4.0 by Kzirkel via Wikimedia Commons, cropped from original.

Today’s guest post is written by sociologist and lecturer, Cara Bowman. She began exploring alternative grading practices in August 2023 after taking an inspirational workshop with Dr. Christina Katopodis (co-author of The New College Classroom). She has implemented a collaborative grading approach in 3 sociology courses (total of 8 sections) while a visiting assistant professor at Stonehill College, and has experienced the transformative power of alternative grading. This fall, she is a lecturer in the College of Arts & Sciences Writing Program and Department of Sociology at Boston University. 

---

My path to alternative grading

After teaching various courses as an adjunct in the Sociology & Anthropology Department at Stonehill College in Massachusetts since 2016, I was offered a position as Visiting Assistant Professor from 2022-2024. In this full-time role, I was presented with greater freedom to explore innovative teaching methods with support from the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.

Stonehill College is a private Catholic school in southeastern Massachusetts serving 2,500 students with a focus on small classes and specialized instruction. About 20-25% of the student body is first-generation college students. Mid-pandemic, beginning in 2022, Stonehill shifted to Division I Athletics, and the demands on student-athletes noticeably increased. Outside stressors increasingly infiltrated the classroom from Fall 2022- Spring 2023. More and more students missed classes, assignments were frequently late or incomplete, and morale was low, so I started to reflect on how I could teach and grade more effectively. 

Subsequently, I was intrigued when I first came across an alternative grading workshop in August of 2023. My training as a critical sociologist led me to an easy acceptance of alternative grading approaches. Critical sociologists seek to understand current power structures and systems in order to develop means to distribute that power in more just ways. I long considered the unequal power dynamics that shape higher education, but now contemplated my own sociology classes. I was compelled to reflect on my teaching techniques and on my positionality as a White, upper-middle class woman with a PhD. I had been inadvertently following an assessment system put in place by those with power to maintain that power. Moreover, alternative grading methods present a challenge to the dominant mode of assessment (and power-granting processes) in the U.S. education landscape. In a conventionally graded class, only a select group of students will benefit, while most will not.¹ Why continue implementing a system that advantages only a few when I could change some key elements to make student success equally accessible to all?

At that time, I was preparing for my second year of teaching a full 4-4 course load. I felt unmotivated after a tough semester in which I failed a first-generation student of color in SOC101: Introduction to Sociology (25 students/class). The failure stung; but, given my grading schema at the time, I did not see an alternative to failing this student due to the major work that was missing. Instead, I saw it as “unfair” to students who had completed the requirements. It was a lose-lose situation. The student had obvious losses to deal with as a result of receiving an F: time, money, course credit, knowledge, and likely trust. And I lost faith in myself as a teacher. I am committed to this profession because of the fulfillment I experience when students deepen their understanding of the world; I felt that I had personally failed because I did not appropriately guide this student to meet the course objectives.

In reflecting on why this failure stayed with me, it was because I had not put my sociological imagination into practice. Sociology as a discipline asks us to use our “sociological imagination” to uncover the connections between “personal troubles” and “public issues.” For example, the “personal trouble” of a struggling student who earns low grades is not solely a consequence of little effort. I even teach this specific lesson when my Introduction to Sociology students read the classic text, Unequal Childhoods. Lareau’s ethnographic research details the subtle (and overt!) ways that social class determines one’s life trajectory, such as through the hidden curriculum in schools. For example, we know that due to financial resources, students who come from wealthy families do better on the SAT.

Social class origins are powerful, and mine overshadowed my sociological training and knowledge. I assumed that my student knew the appropriate process for communicating their struggles in the course. However, a first-generation college student from a working-class background is unlikely to be familiar with the implicit tenets of the hidden curriculum. Echoing Lareau’s findings, Calarco’s study reveals that students who come from working class and poor backgrounds are often taught to trust and obey teachers as the experts - they are not poised to ask questions or for extra support in the same way that middle class students are trained. 

The values instilled by the U.S. education system reflect middle-class standards of behavior. This translates into professors like me expecting that students will advocate for themselves effectively, ask for help when they need it, communicate clearly with authority figures, and manage multiple courses. Yet these lessons are not delineated in a typical college classroom. Accordingly, a student who is unresponsive and missing work likely lacks the tools to navigate the challenges of college, not the motivation. As I can see now, establishing and fostering a caring relationship can make or break how a student (and specifically vulnerable students) performs in my courses. My experience with the student I failed led me to change my teaching philosophy for the benefit of my students. 

Applying the sociological imagination to student assessment 

Sociology courses are particularly well suited to alternative grading practices. Much like the critical thinking required by alternative assessment, applying the sociological imagination to our teaching similarly demands consideration of inequalities that stratify our classrooms and the lives of the individuals who enter them. My participation in the workshop mentioned above showed me how both alternative assessment and sociology entail self-reflection on the part of instructors and transparency with our students about our own biases. 

Encouraged by the natural alignment with my discipline, I felt released from the confines of conventional grading. I developed a collaborative grading approach combined from a variety of leaders in the field of alternative grading.² Once I began reading about the ways that this approach accounted for my concerns about reinforcing inequalities in my classroom, there was no turning back.

I shifted all three of my courses- Introduction to Sociology, Sociology of Families, and Qualitative Methods- into a collaborative grading system starting in Fall 2023. I stopped putting grades on individual assignments. Instead, I provided only qualitative comments on each assignment. I opened up dialogue with students about their work by requiring draft submissions and providing feedback for the final version. I accepted revisions for the first paper until early November and for the final paper during finals period. We met 1:1 to talk about their work at least once. I prioritized getting to know my students and their course goals, letting them know more about me, and forming a trusting, honest relationship with them.

The elements I include in my collaborative grading approach necessitate sociological thinking, thus they align well with my course objectives. When I ask students to set achievable goals, to self-assess, and self-reflect, I am in essence asking them to apply a sociological lens to their lives, their work, and the choices they make as they navigate college. I ask them to contextualize who they are in the classroom. To exemplify this, I am open with students about who I am and what my educational experiences have been; I share the ways they inform who I am as an instructor-privileges, biases, and all. 

Introduction to Sociology: A collaborative grading roadmap

I followed a similar format for each class, but I focus below on the current structure of SOC101: Introduction to Sociology, a course of 25 students.

Goal Setting Letter:

To start the semester, I require a goal setting letter (due the second week of classes). This assignment provides the first step towards self-directed learning. Students are introduced to the idea that they can decide what is most important for them to learn in the context of this course. They are asked to share what they hope to learn over the semester, how they will achieve 2-3 specific course goals, and to reflect on what might get in the way. This last part allows students to share possible barriers like demands from a job, family caregiving, sports, commuting, learning disabilities, etc. I do not require that they disclose personal information, rather I give the invitation to share what they feel is important for me to know.

Self-Assessments:

The National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) outlines key competencies that students should attain in preparation for the workforce. Two of these elements are “career and self-development” and “professionalism.” Accordingly, I require a mid-semester assessment and final self-assessment in which students develop these competencies alongside their sociological imagination as they connect themselves to their structural context. The assessment prompts them to be honest and accountable as they outline the specific work that they put into the course. Self-assessment is not an easy task. I explain to students that this skill is increasingly demanded by the job market, and these assignments give them a chance to practice.

Attendance, Engagement, & Participation:

I expect students to attend class regularly, be engaged, and participate in class discussions. I fill out an attendance sheet for myself each class meeting, and I ask that students notify me if they must miss more than two classes. I check in with a student if I see they’ve missed more than one class without notice. Students are required to describe their level of engagement and participation in the self-assessments. We dedicate some class time to discuss specific examples of engagement (making eye contact/looking up from laptops, no headphones on during lecture/discussion) and participation (speaking in class, small group discussions).

For students who find it challenging to be vocal in class or who have unavoidable absences, I provide additional ways to show engagement with course material, similar to the engagement credits concept. Students have the following options: submit more regular reading reflections (each class instead of each week), email me before class with discussion points or questions related to that day's material, email me thoughts on the discussion after class, schedule a paper peer review session outside class time, chat with me about course topics before/after class, or schedule meetings (in addition to the required 1:1 conference).

One-on-one meetings:

During a two week period around mid-semester, each student schedules a ~five minute meeting with me to review their self-assessments and discuss any concerns about the course. While 1:1 conferences are hugely time consuming for instructors (I taught ~90 students each semester), user-friendly tools such as calendly help to streamline the process. Prior to each meeting, I briefly review my comments on the student’s latest paper assignment and their self-assessment reflections. We address any questions/concerns they have, then discuss what they should push themselves to improve upon for the second half of the semester. Typically, I encourage behaviors such as engaging more in class discussion, submitting more complete drafts for feedback, and keeping up with reading reflections. These personal meetings are crucial to building a trusting foundation with students in a course that is assessed collaboratively.

When I asked for feedback on this in an exit ticket, my students overwhelmingly encouraged me to continue requiring 1:1 meetings. One reported, “I have anxiety and find it hard to schedule meetings on my own and talk to professors outside of class, but having these one-on-one meetings scheduled was very helpful to answer my questions and keep me on track.” Another stated, “I liked having check-ins because I was able to get personalized feedback from my professor which I don't get in the majority of my classes.” I connected with the students face-to-face and learned more about how they approached the course material, so I could then guide them to achieve their goals.

Small shifts can mean big changes

If you are feeling overwhelmed by the options within alternative grading schemas or just not there yet, I echo the calls to start small and simplify. I recommend three straightforward ways to create a more equitable and caring learning experience for students in any course.

One way to build trust and understanding in a conventionally graded course is to assign a goal setting letter that can be marked complete/incomplete. If you ask students what may “get in the way” of their goals, this provides the space they need to introduce themselves to you as whole people who have complex lives outside the course. This opening can lead to more equitable assessment outcomes, even if you don’t change your grading system.

Including a simple feedback loop into assignments is another way to incorporate the principles of more equitable grading. For example, you can require a draft submission for each assignment. Qualitative rubrics help make the feedback process more efficient- outline the necessary criteria for the assignment and create a simple rubric measure for each: excellent, getting there, needs major revision. This gives students greater transparency about what you expect in their assignments.

Furthermore, you might include self-assessment as an ongoing element of the course. Self-assessments can be a questionnaire that is marked complete/incomplete or can be added to an existing assignment. For example, require a reflection paragraph that asks students to outline what they did well and what they struggled with in an assignment. This simple step is a great way to develop their self-assessment skills, and it gives you context about how they think about the work.

These are just a few examples available to instructors that are manageable but can bring greater transparency to your courses (and sociologists would argue that transparency is the enemy of inequality). If we apply our sociological imagination to the events we observe and experiences we hold, we can also start to understand how to make the world a more just, less painful place. If we consider the disparate lives of the individual students we teach in our assessment of their work, in addition to our own biases as instructors, then our classrooms can become promising spaces for positive social change- leading students to feel supported, encouraged, and motivated to learn.

My exploration of alternative grading gave me new energy and inspiration when I realized I could do more than just teach about inequalities in my courses. I turned theory into practice by working more explicitly to undo inequities within my own classroom. Equipped with new teaching tools, today I fully practice the principles of sociology that I hold dear: understanding individuals in their context and questioning taken-for-granted power relations in order to create social change.

---

The views and opinions expressed by guest authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of David Clark, Robert Talbert, or this publication.

1. Joshua Eyler discusses the disadvantages of grades in Failing Our Future: How Grades Harm Students, and What We Can Do about It (2024)

2. See Clark & Talbert, Davidson & Katopodis, Pitts-Donahue, & Stommel for helpful resources on alternative grading practices.