Growth-based grading: A non-traditional approach to grading in leadership education

Abstract

Purpose: A principal pursuit of higher education in the United States is fostering critical thinking, application and empowerment among students. However, a gap exists between this pursuit and traditional grading structures, which can restrict students’ thinking and motivation in pursuit of grade achievement. Therefore, the current pedagogy manuscript describes the development, implementation and evaluation of one system of non-traditional grading, growth-based grading (GBG), within leadership education. Design/methodology/approach: GBG emphasizes students’ self-assessment of their learning in collaboration with the instructor. Specifically, GBG utilizes complete/incomplete assignments, heavy feedback and reflective portfolios to document course engagement and encourage students’ metacognition. GBG was implemented over five courses at two large, land-grant institutions. Participants (N = 83) completed a survey evaluating their perceptions of GBG in comparison to traditional grading. Findings: Quantitative survey results revealed a significant difference between perceptions of GBG and traditional grading with participants perceiving GBG more favorably than traditional grading. Open-ended survey responses emphasized that GBG reduced stress while enhancing focus on class content, learning and creativity. Participants also shared critiques of and suggestions for GBG, including providing more feedback on performance. Practical implications: Curricular leadership educators are urged to regard grading as foundational to pedagogy, interrogating if and how assessment structures align with content, learning objectives and overarching beliefs about leadership education. Originality/value: The field of leadership education has actively explored instructional practices and pedagogy; yet, grading structures, although a significant component of students’ curricular experience, have largely been absent from inquiry.