The academic world is in the throes of a transformative conversation surrounding grading systems in education. An article authored by Dr. Kathleen De Welde, titled “The Revolution Will Not Be Graded: Deepening Our Commitments to the Liberatory Potential of Ungrading,” symbolizes a pivotal moment in this discourse. Published in the journal High Educ in 2025, De Welde’s arguments stimulate a critical examination of conventional grading practices, suggesting that the traditional systems may hinder rather than help students in their academic journeys.
At the heart of De Welde’s thesis lies the assertion that grading systems can perpetuate inequality and stifle creativity. As educators strive to cultivate environments that foster personalized learning, the mechanisms by which students are evaluated are often rooted in outdated paradigms. Instances of grade-centric education lead to a culture of competition rather than collaboration, where the focus shifts from mastering content to merely performing for a grade. De Welde argues that such practices can alienate students, particularly those from marginalized backgrounds who may already struggle against systemic barriers.
De Welde advocates for a paradigm shift toward ‘ungrading,’ a practice that emphasizes formative feedback and personal development over letter grades. By removing the weight of traditional assessments, educators can engage students in a more meaningful dialogue about their learning processes. In this alternative framework, the emphasis is placed on student reflection, metacognition, and the intrinsic value of knowledge acquisition. De Welde builds upon existing research that shows how grades can lead to unnecessary stress and anxiety, which can impede genuine learning.
One of the most compelling aspects of De Welde’s argument is the idea that ungrading can serve as a liberatory practice in education. Rather than merely assessing student performance through a standardized lens, ungrading allows for a more holistic evaluation of learning. This approach can account for the unique experiences and challenges faced by individual students, thereby promoting inclusivity in academic spaces. De Welde illustrates this by highlighting case studies where ungrading practices have led to increased student engagement and satisfaction, as learners felt more empowered and valued in their educational experiences.
While De Welde does acknowledge the potential challenges associated with transitioning away from traditional grading, such as institutional resistance and the need for faculty training, she underscores the importance of this shift. The commitment to ungrading does not imply a lack of accountability; rather, it invites educators to redefine how they measure success. This change requires a reframing of assessment methods to align more closely with learning objectives and outcomes that truly reflect student understanding and application of knowledge.
Moreover, De Welde provides a comprehensive overview of the methodologies that educators can adopt to implement ungrading in their classrooms. This includes offering students opportunities for self-assessment and peer evaluation, fostering a collaborative learning environment. The tools and strategies highlighted in her article encourage a shift from passive receipt of information to an active engagement with the learning process. By fostering a sense of ownership over their education, students can cultivate critical thinking skills and develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter.
A critical voice in the ungrading conversation, De Welde also calls for ongoing research to explore the implications of abandoning grades. As educators consider this paradigm shift, it is essential to collect data that investigates the long-term effects of ungrading on student outcomes, retention rates, and overall academic performance. The exploration of these variables can pave the way for brokering broader institutional changes and developing educational policies that prioritize the well-being and success of all students.
Faculty grappling with the question of how to assess student learning without resorting to grades may find solace in De Welde’s work. She equips educators with practical frameworks that allow for the integration of ungrading in diverse academic contexts. The excitement surrounding ungrading is palpable, and as institutions begin to experiment with this innovative approach, the ripple effects may well be transformative, fostering educational environments that nurture exploration, curiosity, and authentic learning experiences.
Inherent in the conversation about ungrading is also the necessity of equipping faculty members with the necessary support and resources to embrace these changes. Professional development initiatives can play a crucial role in enabling educators to rethink their assessment strategies. By sharing best practices and case studies illustrating successful ungrading implementations, institutions can create communities of practice where educators can collaborate and innovate together.
De Welde’s call to action urges institutions to consider a fundamental reevaluation of their grading policies. The challenge lies not just in the practice of ungrading itself but in dismantling the entrenched systems that define academic success. As the push for equity and inclusion intensifies within education, ungrading emerges as a radical yet necessary step toward truly democratizing the learning experience.
As we propel ourselves into the future of education, the implications of De Welde’s findings resonate beyond the classroom. They reflect a growing recognition that educational success should not be commodified into a simple letter or number, but celebrated as a rich tapestry of individual human experiences and achievements. The journey toward ungrading represents not only a pedagogical shift but a deeper commitment to reimagining our educational values.
With a clearer vision of what ungrading can offer, educators can begin to dismantle the barriers that traditional grading systems impose. They can embrace models that not only promote knowledge acquisition but also empower students to become lifelong learners. While the transition may present challenges, the potential rewards from adopting ungrading practices could lead us to a more equitable and fulfilling educational landscape.
As we move forward in this exciting area of scholarship, the conversation ignited by De Welde’s research will undoubtedly inspire further exploration and innovation. The future of education, liberated from conventional grading practices, challenges us to consider what it truly means to learn and grow — an invitation that should resonate with all engaged in the educational mission.
Subject of Research: The liberatory potential of ungrading in education.
Article Title: The revolution will not be graded: deepening our commitments to the liberatory potential of ungrading.
Article References:
De Welde, K. The revolution will not be graded: deepening our commitments to the liberatory potential of ungrading.
High Educ (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-025-01486-0
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: 10.1007/s10734-025-01486-0
Keywords: ungrading, education, assessment, equity, inclusive education, pedagogical reform.
