Labor-Based Grading Contracts

Philosophy

Labor-based grading contracts prioritize deep engagement and clinical reflection over point accumulation. The approach is grounded in the belief that:

• Literacy and classroom management are social practices tied to power, identity, and relationships
• Student agency, growth, and risk-taking matter more than external compliance
• Grade anxiety undermines genuine learning
• Professional practice requires iteration, not perfection

Core Evaluation System

Satisfactory / Needs Revision

Following an "ungrading" philosophy, individual assignments are not given numerical scores. Instead, all work is evaluated as either:

Key principle: There is no partial credit. Work is revised until it meets the standard.

Grade Bundle Structure

Think of your grade as a building process, not a competition:

• Everyone begins with the foundation
• To earn a higher grade, you add additional layers of work
• You choose the tier you aim for and complete the required labor

Tier 1: Foundation (Grade C)

Complete these core tasks:

1. Weekly "See" Log (Readings & Observation)
2. Simulations/Modules (e.g., IRIS modules, SchoolSims)
3. Short Online Exams (Praxis/certification preparation)

What This Demonstrates: You have mastered foundational concepts and core course expectations.

Tier 2: Engagement (Grade B)

Tier 1 PLUS:
4. Audio/Reflection component (e.g., PERMA lens, voice notes)
5. Community-Building component (e.g., collaborative video, peer engagement)

What This Demonstrates: You have engaged in deeper reflection and collaborative meaning-making.

Tier 3: Capstone (Grade A)

Tiers 1 & 2 PLUS:
6. Principles & Practices Demo (Multimedia Teaching Resource)
7. Final Portfolio (polished professional artifact)

What This Demonstrates: You have created professional leadership resources for the field.

The Rules of the Contract

Satisfactory Standard

To count toward your selected bundle, an assignment must meet the specifications outlined in the assignment prompt.

Revision Policy

If an assignment is marked "Needs Revision," you have one week to revise and resubmit to meet the Satisfactory standard.

"Life Happens" Allowance

You may miss two weekly deadlines for any reason without penalty. No explanation is required.

Attendance & Activity

• Missing a weekly Sunday deadline (beyond your allowance) counts as an absence
• Inactivity for more than five consecutive days triggers contract review
• More than two missed deadlines beyond allowance puts contract "out of fulfillment"

Final Grade Claim

At the end of the semester, you submit a Final Reflection & Grade Claim:

1. Review your work across the semester
2. Provide evidence that you completed your chosen grade bundle
3. Formally claim the letter grade you have earned

The instructor's role is to verify the claim, not to surprise you with a grade.

Implementation in D2L/OAKS

Creating the Grade Scheme

1. Access Grades > Schemes tab
2. Create new scheme with thresholds:

3. Optional: Add "Incomplete" or "Missing" symbol at 0%
4. Apply scheme to assignment folders

Grading Workflow

• Enter 100 for satisfactory work (displays as "Satisfactory")
• Enter 0 or leave empty for work needing revision (displays as "Needs Revision")
• Add revision feedback in comments

Communicating to Students

Addressing Unfamiliarity

Sample framing:

"I know that ungrading or labor-based grading can feel unfamiliar. My teaching is grounded in the belief that literacy and classroom management are social practices tied to power, identity, and relationships. Because of that, I prioritize your agency, growth, and risk-taking over external compliance or point accumulation."

Key Messages

• You are in control: You choose how much labor to take on and which grade to aim for
• Revision is expected: "Needs Revision" is not failure - it's part of the learning process
• The work, not the points: Focus on learning and professional practice rather than grade accumulation
• No surprises: Your final grade is claimed based on completed labor, not instructor judgment

Benefits of This Approach

1. Reduces grade anxiety: Students focus on learning rather than point-chasing
2. Normalizes revision: All professional work involves iteration
3. Honors different capacities: Students choose tiers based on current life circumstances
4. Builds professional habits: Work-until-satisfactory mirrors professional expectations
5. Transparent expectations: Clear criteria eliminate ambiguity

Potential Challenges

Related Concepts

• Critical Pedagogy for STEAM Under Constraint
• Learning Environment Portfolio Design
• Orchestrated Collaboration vs Algorithmic Passivity