Contemporary educational paradigms emphasise the importance of student-centred learning experiences, especially in higher education. The debate surrounding grading and its impact on learning outcomes has been fuelled by the limitations of traditional grading methods (see Cain et al., 2022 for a recent review) and the emergence of various alternative grading systems, such as ungrading (Spurlock, 2023), student-created rubrics (Kilgour et al., 2020), portfolios (Froehlich et al., 2022) and other approaches  (Newton et al., 2020; Reck, 2022).

In modern educational paradigms, such as digitally-enhanced service-learning experiences (Froehlich, 2018; Froehlich et al., 2023) or challenge-based learning (Van Den Beemt et al., 2023), traditional grading metrics often do not align with the experiential nature of these approaches, as they rely on quantifiable assessments rather than qualitative growth and community impact. 

As service-learning and challenge-based learning are widely used approaches in higher education (Gallagher & Savage, 2023; Salam et al., 2019; Sotelino-Losada et al., 2021), it is necessary to consider appropriate grading systems for these approaches. This poster presentation introduces contract grading as a solution to capture the progress and unique contributions of each student in this dynamic learning environment. 

This poster presents a case study on the use of contract grading in a service-learning framework for teacher education. The study highlights the benefits of this approach and provides insights into its implementation. Furthermore, it also discusses the international adoption of this described service-learning experience and the resulting need for a standardized grading approach. In addition to the authors’ reflections, a mixed methods data collection with open and closed questions was conducted as part of the course evaluation. Based on the results, suggestions for further research are presented to better position and evaluate contract grading within service-learning courses.

When looking at the impact of contract grading from the students' perspective, aspects such as transparency and clarity, self-determination and perceived fairness and workload are highlighted. It is noteworthy that there is a tension between the initial stress and confusion at the beginning of the course and the transparency and clarity that students experience once they have grasped the concept. Future research could investigate ways to understand and alleviate the initial stress and overwhelm associated with contract grading, in order to enhance the student experience. Although experimental teaching methods often entail group tasks that may cause individual students to feel a loss of control, students reported a different experience with contract grading. It also mentions individual tasks that indirectly support the project and how they can lead to more self-determination and perceived freedom for students seeking a better grade. This poster presentation analyses the correlation between contract grading and the effectiveness of combining service and learning components in service-learning to create a conducive learning environment. The presentation will conclude with recommendations for educators and areas for future research to optimise the use of contract grading in service-learning and other innovative educational paradigms.

Cain, J., Medina, M., Romanelli, F., & Persky, A. (2022). Deficiencies of Traditional Grading Systems and Recommendations for the Future. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 86(7), 8850. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8850 Froehlich, D. E. (2018). Non-Technological Learning Environments in a Technological World: Flipping Comes To The Aid. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 7(2), 88–92. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2018.7.304 Froehlich, D. E., Hobusch, U., & Moeslinger, K. (2021). Research Methods in Teacher Education: Meaningful Engagement Through Service-Learning. Frontiers in Education, 6, 680404. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.680404 Froehlich, D. E., Martin, A., Holzmayer, M., & Reitinger, J. (2022). Informelles Lernen online: Ein Sprungbrett vom Studium in den Beruf. Fnma Magazin, 2022(3), 15–17. Froehlich, D. E., Wührl, S., & Hobusch, U. (2023). Massive Open Online Courses as enablers of service-learningMassive Open Online Courses as enablers of service learning. https://doi.org/10.3217/ZFHE-18-01/06 Gallagher, S. E., & Savage, T. (2023). Challenge-based learning in higher education: An exploratory literature review. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(6), 1135–1157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1863354 Kilgour, P., Northcote, M., Williams, A., & Kilgour, A. (2020). A plan for the co-construction and collaborative use of rubrics for student learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(1), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1614523 Newton, J. R., Williams, M. C., & Feeney, D. M. (2020). Implementing non-traditional assessment strategies in teacher preparation: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 3(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.03.01.3 Reck, R. M. (2022). Adopting Alternative Grading in an Upper-Level Laboratory Course in Bioengineering. 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962684 Salam, M., Awang Iskandar, D. N., Ibrahim, D. H. A., & Farooq, M. S. (2019). Service learning in higher education: A systematic literature review. Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(4), 573–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09580-6 Sotelino-Losada, A., Arbués-Radigales, E., García-Docampo, L., & González-Geraldo, J. L. (2021). Service-Learning in Europe. Dimensions and Understanding From Academic Publication. Frontiers in Education, 6, 604825. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.604825 Spurlock, S. (2023). Improving Student Motivation by Ungrading. Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, 631–637. https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569747 Van Den Beemt, A., Van De Watering, G., & Bots, M. (2023). Conceptualising variety in challenge-based learning in higher education: The CBL-compass. European Journal of Engineering Education, 48(1), 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2022.2078181