A Letter on Course Pedagogy & (Un)Grading
This is my original course pedagogy letter, penned in 2019 during the first six months of the coronavirus pandemic. A revised (2021) version of this letter is published at A Letter on Pedagogy, Course Design, & Assessment
Every course has an underlying pedagogy — and every instructor is guided by one. Yet, I suspect that many instructors would struggle to articulate their pedagogy(ies) — this has certainly been true for me. I’ve come to realize that it’s an instructor’s duty to critically examine, and students’ right to know, the pedagogical assumptions that shape course experiences (and how an instructor approaches their role, generally). This letter is my attempt to explain the pedagogical underpinnings of this course and how they have shaped my approach in it. It is also an invitation for dialogue on how these can be improved.
To understand my approach in this class, it may be helpful to first know a bit of my pedagogical history. And, for those of you who have taken a course with me before, it will help explain the differences between prior courses and this one.
When I first started teaching, I believed that high expectations and stringent grading were the hallmarks of rigorous and effective master’s education. My viewpoint has changed a lot since then. I still believe in high expectations (and in all of my students’ inherent capability to meet them), however, my experiences and the empirical literature suggest that stringent quantified grading does more harm than good. Questioning the purpose and impact of grades led me down the figurative rabbit hole of trying to understand my own pedagogy. I found that many of my instructional practices did not align with my beliefs regarding the purpose of education, what motivates students, or my role as an instructor.
In my quest to understand, question, and (re)construct my pedagogical assumptions, I have found that the following passage from Jesse Stommel and Sean Morris’s An Urgency of Teachers captures much of my dissatisfaction with many educational practices common to college classes (including my own):
…the project of education has been misdirected…educators and students alike have found themselves more and more flummoxed by a system that values assessment over engagement, learning management over discovery, content over community, outcomes over epiphanies.
My attempt to redirect my educational practices began with (re)assembling my courses from a foundation of carefully articulated principles. These principles (as currently developed) include:
Student wellbeing comes first. I am convinced that learning is gravely undermined by a course context that ignores (or only pays lip service to) the inevitable conditions of life. Physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual trauma are real and have real impacts on one’s ability to engage in learning. Jobs are lost, loved ones become ill and die, and sometimes the world around us falls apart. I am committed to your academic journey, but your wellbeing comes first.
Equity and justice are urgent social projects. Many educational institutions and practices perpetuate the discrimination of our wider society, further marginalizing Black, Brown, and Indigenous people, people of differing abilities, and people of genders or gender identities other than those reflecting “conventional” notions of male masculinity. I am committed to social equity and justice as urgent projects in and outside of the classroom. I am also acutely aware that I (a white man) will fall short of these ideals. I invite you to hold me and this course to them, and to help me learn.
Failure is productive. We learn little from containing our ambitions to only those tasks and goals in which we know we will not falter. This simple fact is too often overlooked in educational settings. Take risks, fail often, and learn volumes in the process.
Classroom walls are obstacles. And, the same is true for online classes, where the virtual “walls” of Canvas arbitrarily confine course activity from the rich learning potential that the rest of the internet — not to mention analogue reality — offer. I think the most organic and impactful learning comes when course ideas are tested and applied in empirical settings — either digital or analog. My courses still use Canvas (although they might not always) but only insofar as it is useful.
Learning cannot be externally incentivized. Many instructors use grades and grading schemes as motivational tools. Until this semester, so did I. Jesse Stommel points out that the problem is not that grades don’t motivate (they do) — it is that they don’t motivate learning. Instead, as articulated by Alfie Kohn: “Research shows three reliable effects when students are graded: They tend to think less deeply, avoid taking risks, and lose interest in the learning itself.” It’s my goal for assessment to come in a variety of forms, including self-reflection and peer review, in a way that encourages and fosters intrinsically-motivated learning.
As I hope is clear in this letter, my instructional approach is an ongoing project. And, as I hope is also clear, I intend to recruit you as a collaborator. I invite your critical engagement with and reflection on our course. And, I welcome constructive feedback on where it can be improved. I genuinely believe that the best vehicle for improvement is an open, critical, and constructive dialogue around your expectations for this class, your experiences in it, and your vision for what it could be.
Sincerely,
Prof David Carter
