that allows flexibility and growth. Student misunderstandings of expectation may cause some grade appeals, and the frequency of these appeals may be minimized by clearly communicating objectives and offering comprehensive assessment tools such as rubrics.
This chapter will discuss…
• The historical and legal background for formal grade appeals.
• Using and encouraging informal grade appeals as learning tool for students to reevaluate their work.
• Preventing grade appeals caused by confusion and unclear instructions.
• Providing useful feedback through use of clear expectations, explanations of point deduction/accumulation, offers of help, and consistent feedback among all students.
The formal grade appeal process varies by university. At Virginia Tech for example, if an undergraduate student’s discussion with the instructor does not resolve a grade dispute, the student can then appeal to the department or division head (Office of the University Registrar, Virginia Tech, 2020).
If the dispute is not resolved at the department/division level it can be appealed to the college dean. Students seeking a formal grade appeal are encouraged to make their request as soon as possible, but no later than the end of the following term after the grade was assigned. University policy at Virginia Tech states that a professor has sole prerogative over grades assigned in his or her course, and that professors must assign grades based on established criteria rather than on students’ personal conduct. There is also an appeal procedure for graduate students to follow. This process is similar, except if the dispute is not resolved at the department level, then the graduate student can appeal to the Dean of the Graduate school with a formal statement explaining his or her reasoning (Graduate School, Virginia Tech, 2020). The dispute is then reviewed by a Graduate Appeals Committee which consists of three faculty members, one graduate student, and an additional faculty member who is knowledgeable in the subject area of the appeal. The Grade Appeals Committee may hold a formal hearing, and ultimately gives a recommendation to the Dean of the Graduate School to act on with consultation from the provost.
In 1984, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) identified teachers’ “academic freedom” as: “the freedom to research and publish the results; freedom in discussing the teachers’ subject matters in the classroom; freedom from institutional censorship when teachers speak as citizens.” In 1998, the AAUP stated that assessing student performance is a faculty responsibility (as opposed to administrative responsibility) and that it is part of a professor’s classroom freedom. However, the AAUP’s statements do not have any legal standing, so there have been court cases regarding whether college or university administrators may change a student’s grade without instructor approval. There have been several court cases that acknowledge a professor’s right to assign grades to students, including Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985), which ruled that dismissing a student from a medical program for failing an exam did not infringe on a student’s property rights; and Parate v. Isibor, 868 F.2d 821 (6th Cir. 1989) which ruled that university professors have a First Amendment right to assign grades based on their professional judgment. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in 2001 that a grade
change by an administrator does not violate a professor’s First Amendment right to free speech (Brown v. Armenti, 247 F.3d 69, 3rd Cir. 2001)). The 6th Circuit Appeals Court stated a year later that it is a First Amendment violation if the administration pressures or coerces a professor to change a student’s grade (Yohn v. Board of Regents of the University of Michigan et al., 2002).
Formal grade appeals are a preventable drain on resources. Instead of filing appeal paperwork and hearing cases on panels, professors could be spending time on items in their job description (e.g. writing research grants, publishing research papers, developing class lesson plans, grading student assignments, extension work, etc.). Oslo University in Norway spent an estimated $300 per appeals case between 2003 and 2006, which totaled $1.2 million (Gynnild, 2011). Therefore, it is in the best interest of both professors and administrators to avoid formal grade disputes when possible.
There are resources available that help instructors avoid grading disputes.
These resources are often tools that help students understand their grades, so they do not feel they received a different mark than they deserved. The AAUP has on its website a list of “practical suggestions” regarding student grades, including developing clear policies on grading standards and appeal procedures; applying appeal policies uniformly across students; making appeal policies available to students, faculty, and administrators; and including faculty in the same department or closely related fields on an appeals committee when a grade is disputed (Euben, 2001). There is a lack of higher education literature on grade appeals, and therefore we do not know how many professors consciously use tools to help prevent students from appealing grades.
Not all professors view grade appeals as negative (i.e., as “disputes”). Some professors welcome students who evaluate their grades and present arguments for a higher score. Corrada (2013) explains why grade appeals should be encouraged in graduate-level (law school) courses and defends against some concerns that faculty may have about supporting student appeals. The author describes the method that he uses in his law school classes, involving a midterm exam that encourages appeals of the exam (instead of only offering a final exam). A midterm exam was added to the courses to promote student review (where a student may learn more about a subject from mistakes made on an exam) and ensure the grade for a student or class wouldn’t rely on a single grade (final exam). The author also notes that anecdotally, his students’ final exam grades were higher after he started 122 | Grade Appeals
administering a midterm exam than they were before. Corrada believes that students sometimes have good arguments to receive credit, and students sometimes deserve a better grade than they initially received. They should also be held accountable for any of his grading mistakes/lack of clarity.
As noted above, Corrada (2013) addresses concerns often voiced over encouraging grade appeals, including (1) making extra work (teaching is less rewarded than publishing); (2) Flexibility of grades/challenged authority as a teacher; (3) a high percentage of grade changes might reflect that the grades are not credible. Corrada explains that grade appeals do not need to take up a significant amount of time. He promotes the efficiency of a grade appeal/formative assessment procedure by only allowing students to submit requests that are maximum of one page long, and are turned in within one week of receiving the midterm exam grades and exam key. Furthermore, Corrada believes that students’ benefit is more valuable than the marginal extra work of an appeals process. Regarding the flexibility of grades, Corrada explains that some grading is objective and that a professor may assign letter grades (A vs. D). Still, finer distinctions (A vs. A-) may sometimes be subjective and imprecise. Corrada does not believe that a high rate of appeals for his midterm exam (historically around 70%) lowers his grades’ credibility or challenges his authority. Many students already believe that grades are subjective and not perfect. Hence, an appeals process allows students to think critically about their answers, what they got wrong, better defend their answers, and question their previous assumptions (Corrada, 2013). For these reasons, grade appeals may translate well to undergraduate college courses and especially advanced courses that build upon the basic knowledge of subjects.
Dealing with formal grade appeals takes time and effort away from other tasks on both the professor/departmental and administrative scales. It is in instructors’ best interests to reduce the number of formal grade appeals.
Instructors can use informal grade appeals (the type discussed in this chapter) to deliver student feedback and allow for growth. Using grading as an intentional form of instructor feedback while maintaining transparency expectations and consistency among students may help in student learning (Corrada, 2013).