In my opinion, grades in higher ed dance classes are one of the ways we reinforce the power of the teacher and can diminish the creativity and voice of the student. And so I’m constantly seeking ways to make my dance teaching practice more consent-forward, trauma-informed, and psychologically safe—switching to “ungrading” forms of assessment in my classes. 

Ungrading is not a single practice of assessment, nor a simple matter of “just not giving grades.” Instead, it’s an umbrella term for practices that emphasize learning over assessing, process over product, and intrinsic motivation for growth over external rewards. Ungrading practices work to remove the control of the teacher, present in the rewards and punishments of grades, so that students can be more free to explore and question during class, without the fear of a “bad grade” or being a “difficult student.” Additionally, ungrading practices provide a variety of benefits, including support for differentiated learning, anti-racist pedagogy, collaboration, community building, and body positivity.

In addition to reporting on my personal experiences, I spoke with six other dance educators who are proponents of ungrading practices when it comes to teaching dance. 

Why Ungrade Dance? 

Teaching composition/choreography courses at Texas Tech University to students in the dance BA, BFA, and MFA programs, Dr. Ali Duffy, PhD, made an important connection: “I find that students can become hyper-focused on points, numbers, and letters when grades represent the primary way for them to illustrate learning and growth. When educators take the pressure off of the mighty grade, possibilities open for greater depth, diverse expression, and risk taking.”

Duffy isn’t the only dance instructor to admit that grades inhibit learning. Dr. Jessica Zeller, PhD, a ballet professor at Texas Christian University School for Classical & Contemporary Dance, has written multiple blog posts on her approach to grading, or, more accurately, ungrading. (Her upcoming book, Humanizing Ballet Pedagogies, includes a section on grades and assessments.) 

“Grades and learning are not the same,” Zeller says. One of the reasons she was drawn to ungrading practices is because of the systems of values that affect academic dance. “I don’t think it’s possible to have a student-centered class if the professor is the sole assessor of that,” she says. “I have found [ungrading] practices to explicitly support student autonomy, goal-setting, and progress toward their desired goals and outcomes for learning dance.”

Particularly in ballet (Zeller’s field of expertise), bodies with genetic dispositions to turnout and flexibility, as well as those that fit Eurocentric ideals, are more likely to be considered “successful.” But that doesn’t mean students without those features are not working or learning. “How am I not grading their body?” Zeller asked herself. Her solution was to remove herself from the grading equation. “Equity has improved because [ungrading] gets me out of the way, interrupts any bias I hold.” 

Duffy felt similarly for her composition/choreography classes. Through ungrading, she did not “impose [her] own values onto their work,” and instead freed students to explore their own creative voices. 

Dr. Alexia Buono, PhD, who teaches arts pedagogy for the Department of Education at the University of Vermont, says: “Ungrading is a liberatory educational model. It reworks education to remind us we are all human. Learning is not linear; it never ends. It invites space for our students and us as professors to be the humans that we are, rather than strive for perfection. Ungrading is a way to not just say we are refusing grading, but we are rebuilding a liberatory system with our students in collaboration with students.”

Ungrading Dance Practices 

Buono and Zeller teach a variety of dance courses in vastly different programs. Both use feedback-based assessment where each student provides a detailed written or verbal assessment of their learning, and the professor provides in-depth verbal feedback, sharing what they see as the student’s successes and strengths, as well as opportunities for growth. The narratives, on both the student’s and the educator’s sides, attempt to take a holistic view of the person, their circumstances, and their learning. The professor’s response contains actionable information, considerably more than seeing a letter grade would provide.

In Zeller’s technique classes, students create their own midterm grades after reflecting on their learning and execution, and include opportunities for growth which Zeller emphasizes cannot be reflected fully in a letter grade. She uses these reflections to direct their work going forward. For finals, students choose a letter grade for their classwork and accompany it with a written rationale. Zeller combines that with a jury score (a score given to students by a panel of educators from the department as they perform combinations meant for evaluation) and meets with each student individually to discuss their final grades before they are submitted. In this way, her voice and decision are not the only factors determining a student’s grade. Buono also uses conferences with students to determine the grade that is submitted to the institution. 

Heather Castillo, MFA, associate professor of dance studies at California State University, Channel Islands, has seen her jazz technique classes become more equitable through co-grading. Castillo and her students design their rubric for the course together, actively dismantling hierarchies and centering student agency. Students use this rubric to assess their own progress throughout the semester in their class journals three times throughout the semester, at weeks 5, 10, and 15. They then submit a final, summarizing their progress toward their goal. These scores, combined with attendance scores, create students’ final grades. 

Students in Duffy’s choreography class also design their assessments. Each unit (site-specific, for example) begins with watching dance within the genre and then doing movement studies. From observation and experience, the students and Duffy create a list of elements they feel are important to dance creation in that category. Each student chooses several of those elements to incorporate in their creative work that will culminate the unit. Students assign higher point values to the aspects they feel are more important, and less to others, for a total of 100. Duffy evaluates each student’s choreography by their individual assessment guide and values. 

In technique classes, I use a form of narrative grading similar to all of the above. Students choose five goals from 10 provided on a “Movement Experiences Guide.” The tenth goal on the guide is “other,” allowing students to state their own goal and define what it would look like. All goals are evaluated on a scale of one to ten. At midterms, students submit a written, audio, or video assessment of their progress towards those goals, with a rationale drawn from their weekly class journals. That score out of fifty is submitted as the midterm grade. Students may then decide to adjust or keep their goals for the second half of the semester. At finals, the process is repeated. 

I also use specs grading (also called “specifications grading” or “pass/fail grading”) coupled with contract or labor-based grading in dance theory classes. The contract, found in the syllabus, is a letter grade tied to a “complete” number of tasks. To be “complete,” students must “meet spec” on assignments like weekly responses. The student selects (and commits to) and completes the number of assignments for their desired grade. I appreciate the transparency that surrounds this type of grading, as well as the student’s active choice to consent to a grade.

Much like Zeller and Buono, Dr. Andrea Markus, EdD, who currently teaches modern dance at NYU Steinhardt, found that narrative ungrading practices support her embrace of abolitionist teaching practices. Grades for her too often felt like ranking students, or even breaking them. Markus affirms that learning does not look the same for every body and embodied learning is valuable learning. “I really do want to teach. I don’t want to ‘weed out,’ ” she explains.

Gina T’ai, who teaches both performance history and theory at Beloit College, also removes rank by collaborative grading. Tai’s co-grading practice includes feedback from peers, resulting in improved class community. This is valuable, she says, as “I want all of our learning outcomes to be on growth…and we grow within community.”

Thoughts for Educators Considering Ungrading

The first question one must ask when considering shifting from a grading to ungrading practice is: Are you willing to invest in changing your system, even if you can’t change the system? Transparent conversations around the “why” and “how” of ungrading will likely be necessary with students, colleagues, and administration. Grading has become an entrenched part of teaching, and the reasons why and how we do it are often left unexamined. And, regardless of your reasons, you will likely still have to “translate” the classwork into a grade for your institution.

For me, ungrading has been both rewarding and fulfilling. I have found that the work I receive from ungraded students is much more compelling, because they are invested in it. Personal assessments I receive from students are inspiring and interesting. Sometimes they provide important insights into their humanity and learning process. While it takes more time for me to read, watch, or listen to these assessments and provide students with meaningful feedback than it does for me to grade multiple-choice tests, it’s also a lot more fun for me, and useful for students. 

Remember: There is no single way to do ungrading. The instructors featured in this article have found methods that work for them. Buono describes ungrading as “just a way I’m practicing through my continued un/learning and responsiveness to my students.” 

​​“This is a journey,” she adds, “and you don’t have to do it alone. It is rigorous, it demands effort and presence—and I think it is worth it.”  

Resources 

• Ungrading: Why Rating Students Undermines Learning (and What to Do Instead), edited by Susan D. Blum
• Works by Alfie Kohn, including Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes
• Undoing the Grade: Why We Grade, and How to Stop, by Jesse Stommel