Lowering the Stakes: Quasi-Experimental,Mixed-Methods Evaluation of a Restructured Grading Approach in a Graduate Public Health Research Methods Course

Abstract

In schools and programs of public health, active learning and restructured feedback strategies may improve student learning and course performance compared to traditional lecture-based formats and grading systems. To promote student engagement and active learning, we implemented the team-based learning (TBL) model and a restructured grading approach based on principles of “ungrading” in the required behavioral research methods course of a master’s level public health curriculum. We conducted a quasi-experimental, mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation of restructured grading approach (two sections, n = 46) compared to the traditional grading approach (two sections, n = 34). For the restructured grading sections, numeric grades were removed for weekly team quizzes and team assignments. We administered and analyzed pre- and post-course surveys to compare perceived mastery of course learning objectives, intrinsic motivation, and perceptions of grading and instructor feedback by grading approach. Additionally, we compared course grades and final paper grades by grading approach and conducted two focus groups (one for each approach). The results indicate that students’ learning, satisfaction, and perceptions of the course were mainly equivalent across grading approaches. Students in the restructured grading sections demonstrated a few modestly improved outcomes compared to their peers in the traditional grading courses. Students in the restructured grading sections had slightly higher mean course grades, reported greater increase in confidence to critically evaluate research designs, and found team quizzes to be more helpful. Removing grades for team quizzes and assignments supported student learning and reduced student stress.