Undoing the Grade: Why We Grade, and How to Stop by Jesse StommelMy rating: 4 of 5 stars
Jesse Stommel is (and has been) one of the most important voices in "ungrading" as a practice. His insights shared on social media, various blogs, and in previous publications have done much to foster the important dialogue(s) that have multiplied over the last decade or so. There's a lot in this tiny volume that is great for excerpting, but the manifesto-like tone and compilation of previous writings (which is more of what it is rather than a book) frustrated me occasionally, especially as someone who is not new to these topics.
Stommel makes a convincing case for "why" we shouldn't grade, for the most part, but the "how to stop" part could be a bit more robust in terms of nuance and detail. That said, there are some really important take-aways, even for those who might not want to adopt a complete "ungrading" approach. Stommel writes, "My goal in eschewing grades has been to more honestly engage student work rather than simply evaluate it" (2). This is a key factor and should be an overarching pedagogical objective for anyone looking into alternative assessments (I use the term in acknowledgement of its problematic aspects). There are also some really wonderful pithy quotes: "Grades are the bureaucratic ouroboros of education" (11) sums up the raison d'etre for Stommel's work, in that it isn't just about grading/not grading/ungrading, etc..., but looking at the larger structural failings of education. "Ungrading" (broadly interpreted) is one way to fight back, and it can be done without necessarily jeopardizing one's gainful employment, especially if it is grounded in sound pedagogy and includes student dialogue and buy-in. That's not to say everyone will have the academic freedom to do so, but as more and more educators make "plus 1" changes (to borrow from Behling and Tobin's Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education), the tide may eventually turn.
Stommel's indictment of relegating "pedagogy" to the LMS is spot-on, although I'd push back a bit at his disdain for rubrics. I appreciate and agree with his criticism of "overly mechanistic" rubrics that are more focused on "efficiency in evaluation" (29), but I gently part company with him when he says: "...when rubrics are given in advance to students, they are likely to close down possibility by encouraging students to work toward a prescribed notion of excellence." (30). While I can see that, I would offer that the right rubric can be an excellent tool for transparency of expectations (especially if those expectations are cultivated through dialogue with the students, as Stommel advocates). With LMS incorporating AI more frequently to assist with things like making rubrics, I fear rubrics are being defined, especially for new faculty, as mechanistic tools for evaluation rather than realizing a fuller potential that they could have as a pedagogical implement for engagement and transparency.
In "How to Ungrade" Stommel says, "If you're a teacher and you hate grading, stop doing so much of it." (68). He helpfully differentiates the conversation from one about "efficiency" (a word I'd like to see removed from pedagogical spaces, at least until we regain some balance as far as AI is concerned). I think there's a lot of joy to be had from engaging with student work, and this might shift the conversation a bit: rather than aiming for "less grading" it might be about spending that energy cultivating relationships and I think Stommel makes a strong and impassioned case for doing just that . Overworked and underpaid teachers are (rightfully so) often leaning into "easier said than done" because they are exhausted. So, I'd encourage those who are new to the ideas of people like Paulo Freire and bell hooks to use Stommel's book as a starting point for inspiration, and try out some of the concrete examples for alternative assessment in Chapter 8.
View all my reviews







































