The Grading Conference

Call For Abstracts

The Grading Conference will support four presentation formats in 2025 (posters, talks, workshops, and panel discussions). With the exception of panel discussions, each presentation format includes several different types of papers that we encourage for submission.

Description of Paper Types and Session Formats

Work-in-Progress

Studies, classroom practices, theoretical frameworks, etc. at an early to intermediate stage for which authors are seeking feedback from the community. (Limited to posters)

Classroom practices

Paper or workshop is focused on instruction, including classroom innovations and lessons learned. Abstracts should describe the practice and implementation, recommendations, assessment results, and reflections of the instructor.

Research

This category includes research studies that are quantitative or qualitative in nature, literature reviews, and explorations of theories related to alternative grading.

Quantitative or qualitative studies describe the motivation and background, purpose, relevant prior work, theoretical framework(s), methods, results, and implications.
Literature reviews describe the motivation, methods, and findings. These include both scoping reviews and meta-analyses.
Theoretical explorations investigate elements of alternative grading in relation to one or more theoretical frameworks.

Faculty Development

These papers can include descriptions of training programs, best practices, theoretical models, and exploratory work that brings forward or synthesizes a new idea relevant to faculty or the faculty development profession and/or practice. Abstracts should describe the practice or program, lessons learned, implementation, recommendations, and any results or outcomes.

Panel Discussion

This should be of broad interest to the alternative grading community. Proposer will host the session, develop initial Q&A questions for the panel and will secure an additional 3-6 panelists. Abstracts should describe the theme or objective, as well as the relevance and individuals served. List potential panelists (names and affiliations), as well as sample potential questions.

Workshops

Interactive sessions providing attendees an opportunity to learn about a topic in depth and find ways to apply the knowledge to their own settings. Abstracts should describe the target audience, including any prior experience/knowledge needed, the learning outcomes, and what participants will do during the workshop. Highlight interactive components (e.g., group work, interactive exercises). These sessions will run as a zoom meeting with breakout room capability.

Evaluation Criteria

Abstracts will be reviewed by a committee according to the following criteria:

1. Is the topic of the abstract related to grading and alternative grading?
2. Does the abstract match the format and type of paper selected in the submission?
3. Is the writing clear?

In addition, submissions will also be evaluated on additional criteria depending on the type of submission.

Posters & Talks

For Classroom Practices submissions:

1. Does the abstract describe the classroom context?
2. Is the practice and implementation (or proposed implementation) described?
3. Are results (assessment results, instructor reflections, or survey data) described?
4. Does the abstract identify recommendations for others or for future iterations?

For Research submissions:

1. Does the abstract describe the research type (quantitative, qualitative, literature review, or theoretical exploration)?
2. Is the motivation and/or background described?
3. Are the research goals or questions listed?
4. Are the methods or theoretical basis for theory papers described?
5. Are results or findings (or status of research) clearly described?
6. Are implications of the work clearly described?

For Faculty Development submissions:

1. Does the abstract describe the context and/or target audience?
2. Does the abstract describe the program, practice, model or exploration?
3. Does the abstract describe the implementation (prior or proposed)?
4. Does the abstract describe the results or outcomes (as applicable)?
5. Does the abstract describe the lessons learned (as applicable)?
6. Does the abstract include recommendations and next steps?

Panel Discussions

1. Does the abstract describe the theme or objective of the panel?
2. Are sample questions for the panel included?
3. Does the submission identify potential panelists?

Workshops

1. Does the abstract clearly describe a topic or focus?
2. Does the abstract identify learning outcomes for workshop participants?
3. Is the target audience identified?
4. Does the abstract describe any prior experience/knowledge needed by the target audience?
5. Does the abstract describe the submitter’s prior experience, knowledge, and expertise in the topic?
6. Does the abstract describe workshop activities that are aligned with the proposed learning outcomes?
7. Does the abstract incorporate elements of interactivity with materials and fellow participants, and use additional evidence-based approaches to facilitate learning?