MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7110542336

Question the status quo through (re)creation, (un)learning, and (re)iteration: Alternative grading in higher education

2025· article· en· W7110542336 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma; Oklahoma State University; Central Oklahoma University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)Status quoHigher educationOppressionQualitative researchFocus groupFormative assessment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to bell hooks, education is the practice of freedom—of liberatory practice where the classroom is the “most radical space of possibility in the academy” (1994:12). The classroom is a space ideally designed to disrupt and question the status quo of knowledge production and social responsibility. There is great potential for liberation in education, but we can still observe forms of subjugation, unquestioned obedience, constraint, and oppression. One place oppression shows up is in the traditional grading system. Grades have been shown to reduce risk taking and creativity, be a major stressor, and increase anxiety. This two-phase research project based on teacher interviews and a student survey examined the impact and perceptions of alternative grading in higher education. In Phase 1, 80 semi-structured interviews were conducted with higher education teachers who have implemented alternative grading. They were asked how they define and practice ungrading, what impact ungrading has on stress, and mental health outcomes of college students and educators. Teacher interviews were coded and analyzed to inform the student survey along with direct feedback from participants via a collaborative GoogleDoc. Phase 2 consisted of a Qualtrics survey disseminated to students who attended alternative graded courses across the U.S., Canada, Brazil, and Europe. Students were asked about the benefits and challenges of alternative grading and traditional grading. In addition, they were asked questions about stress as it related to alternative and traditional grading. Qualitative responses were analyzed for this study, n= 370-445). The benefits of alternative grading for students proposed by teachers included reduction in stress, allowing students to focus more on learning than grades, more equitable, and giving students more agency. Teachers often felt more fulfilled and provided a more equitable curriculum. Students responded with feelings of reduced stress, increased agency, and increased focus on learning over grades. In addition, students reported higher levels of stress in traditional courses when compared to their alternatively graded course. Students also reported reviewing feedback more often and found the feedback to be more helpful in alternatively graded courses compared to their traditionally graded courses.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it