Moving Toward Ungrading in an Undergraduate Microbiology Laboratory Course
Presented by:
Morgan Alford, The University of British Columbia
Learning is undermined when students focus on marks. Come find a simple strategy for re-centring your students’ focus on actionable feedback and hence learning.

Hear it from the author:
Key words:
Alternative Grading, Performance, Feedback
Abstract:
The process of learning is undermined by traditional grading systems in which marks are prioritized over feedback. Implementing rubrics inspired by alternative grading practices can address this problem. The EMRN rubric is a four-level rubric for evaluating student work. It uses a simple flowchart to categorize student work into one of four bins: “Excellent”, “Meets expectations”, “Revision needed”, or “Not assessable”. The EMRN rubric prioritizes clear criteria and actionable feedback while de-emphasizing numeric grades. Here, I share how I adapted EMRN rubrics to be suitable for an undergraduate microbiology laboratory course within the confines of a traditional grading system.
Outcomes:
1. Distinguish between marks, grades and feedback.
2. Describe the impact of traditional grading on student performance and motivation.
3. Create a strategy for implementing specifications-based rubrics in a traditional grading environment with the goal of communicating feedback, enhancing performance and bolstering motivation.
References:
Blum, S. D., & Kohn, A. (2020). Ungrading: Why rating students undermines learning (and what to do instead) (First edition). West Virginia University Press.
Butler, R., & Nisan, M. (1986). Effects of no feedback, task-related comments, and grades on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.78.3.210
Schinske, J., & Tanner, K. (2014). Teaching more by grading less (or differently). CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(2), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.CBE-14-03-0054
Stutzman, R. Y., & Race, K. H. (2004). EMRF: Everyday rubric grading. Mathematics Teacher, 97(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.97.1.0034