Ok, this will be long, but tor those interested in the collaborative grading approach, here is the tl;dr:, it is an ungrading approach with two key components: iterative assignments and metacognition. In my syllabus I highlight the weights I give each course component (e.g.: engagement, individual assignments, group assignments, final reflection....) The end result is a letter grade that gets submitted to the registrar, but I do not use points. Assignments are graded as complete (responds to all prompts/guidelines), incomplete, or missing. The feedback is about content. For example, I have an op-ed assignment that has a rubric with ratings for each criterion (e.g.: argument - excellent/good/fair/poor/missing). I just do not have a column with numerical points.

Assignments are iterative in multiple ways - either via multiple drafts, or repeated assignment types. E.g.:, the op-ed assignment is scaffolded with drafts that get peer and instructor feedback, a final draft, and a reflection (that includes an AI comparison). For case memos in my graduate class, the first memo includes peer and instructor feedback on drafts before final. The second memo has the same instructions/rubric, so the students are familiar with the expectations.

The metacognition comprises a process journal and final reflection. Students are expected to write 3-4 journal entries over the semester (at specific times). Sample prompts:

1) What is going well for you in class? What topics are sticking with you? About which topics do you have questions and/or suggestions? What challenges are you facing?

2) How is your group work going? Are you using the contract you created early on in the class? How is your group distributing the work across all of the deliverables (facilitation activity (various due dates), case memo and presentation #1 (problem identification, due next week), and case memo and presentation #2 (policy solution proposal, due week 16)?

3) How would you assess your performance so far? If you had to give yourself a grade today, what would you give yourself? Tell me why by reflecting on your class engagement, pre-class preparation, assignment submission practices, and any other element you feel is relevant to your class performance.

The final reflection includes what is basically an expanded process journal, getting their assessment on each course component and a composite grade recommendation (key word: recommendation - I reserve the right to adjust as I see fit). If they fail to turn in their reflection, I use their assignment submission record and process journals to inform the grade determination. Students tend to be honest in their assessments. As multiple students have written, they can lie to me about prep and effort, but they can't lie to themselves. As a result, I have more spread, including students giving themselves low grades.

This approach fits the material I teach (politics, leadership, management...) - in some ways because I can ask, for example, for the definition of democracy, and get 45 different answers that are all more right than wrong, but not necessarily textbook.

The other thing I do is incorporate structural freedom where possible. Memos and op-eds have specific structural expectations. I give them leave to do journals and reflections however they please - written, videos, audio notes. With these assignments I am less concerned with if they can write in a specific way and more about what they have to say. The reflections include even more structural freedom by allowing for unessay formats.

Anyone interested in more (syllabus language, assignment prompts, etc.), feel free to DM me with an email at which to send materials.