For centuries, grading has been the dominant language of education. From Yale’s early descriptors in the 1700s to the familiar A–F scale, grades were never created to capture learning but to sort students. Despite their longevity, grades remain a blunt instrument, reducing the complexity of the student experience into a single symbol. The critical question we must ask is: what are we really measuring?
When institutions claim that assessment measures learning outcomes, we must pause and consider whether a grade actually reflects this. Does a single mark on an essay or exam capture the knowledge, skills, and growth an individual student has developed across a unit? Does a final grade across multiple units truly communicate an individual student’s accomplishment in achieving course learning outcomes? Susan Blum, Alfie Kohn, David Clark, Robert Talbert, and Jesse Stommel, among many others, have all argued that grades rarely achieve this. At best, grades offer the illusion of precision. At worst, grades actively distort what we claim to value in higher education.
Students recognise this distortion too. When they ask, “Will this be on the test?” or “What do I need to do to pass?”, they are responding to a system that privileges grades over learning. Grades can also signal to students that mistakes are failures, rather than growth opportunities, shifting students’ approach to their education from curiosity to compliance. The game becomes about accumulating points rather than learning and developing understanding.
Ungrading seeks to challenge this narrative. It is not about the absence of assessment, but about reimagining what assessment communicates. Instead of compressing learning into numbers or letters, ungrading centres on dialogue, feedback, and reflection. Stommeldescribes ungrading as “raising an eyebrow” at the systemic practice of grading. This, a refusal to accept grades as neutral or inevitable. Clark and Talbert’s work on alternative grading further demonstrates that when grades are de-emphasised, students are more likely to take intellectual risks and engage deeply with material. This can allow feedback to shift from negotiations with educators over points, to genuine conversations about progress, possibility, and learning.
The implications are significant. If grades do not reliably reflect achievement of unit or course learning outcomes, then what purpose do they serve? Kohn reminds us that grades often function as motivators of performance rather than indicators of learning, while Blum’s edited collection Ungrading highlights how educators across disciplines are questioning whether grades do more harm than good. Talbert argues that authentic assessment practices must align with what institutions say they value. This includes critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. Yet these qualities are rarely captured by a single percentage or letter grade.
Of course, moving toward ungrading is not a simple process. Students, conditioned by years of graded schooling, can feel anxious when numerical benchmarks are removed. Educators too may worry about accountability or rigour. Yet small steps in reframing a single assessment, experimenting with narrative evaluations, or pairing feedback with self-reflection, can open space for more authentic conversations about learning over grades.
Ultimately, the challenge is one of integrity, one that AI has recently and continues to challenge Higher Education in. If we claim assessment measures learning outcomes, then we must confront whether grades truly serve that purpose. Or could it be that grades persist because of tradition, convenience, and external expectations? Ungrading asks us to bring assessment back into alignment with what we say we value: learning, growth, and accomplishment.
Reflection for Educators
- Do the grades you assign genuinely reflect what students have learned in your unit or course?
- How well do grades communicate achievement of learning outcomes to students, educators, or employers?
- In what ways might feedback tell a more accurate story of learning than grades?
- What parts of your current assessment practices reward compliance rather than learning?
- How might you begin to reframe assessment so that it reflects accomplishment, growth, and understanding rather than a score?
Latest Posts
- Leading With Intent: Why Faculty Leadership Matters More Than Ever
- From Click, Read, Submit, Repeat to Listen, Watch, Think: Designing Learning Beyond the LMS
- What If Failure Isn’t Failure? Rethinking Learning in Higher Education
- Content Can Be Delivered Anywhere. Teaching Cannot.
- Seeing the Thinking: What Creative Arts Assessment Practices Can Offer Other Disciplines
2 thoughts on “The False Precision of Grades: What Are We Really Measuring?”