How Does the Use of Contract Grading Affect the Quality of Student Writing?: A Comparative Study of Essays from First-Year Writing Courses

Abstract

Though grading contracts have been used in higher education for nearly a century, their recent uptake in first-year writing courses raises urgent questions about fairness, consistency, and alignment of values and assessment practices. Critics of contract grading cite concerns they will lead students to default to do the minimum required and thus limit their learning. The lack of valid, reliable research focused on student writing outcomes has left instructors and writing programs to rely on theory and intuition rather than empirical evidence in making decisions about grading approaches. This study used a between-groups design to compare learning demonstrated in student writing in course sections using contract grading and per-assignment letter grade approaches. Writing samples were assessed for evidence of five common learning criteria using a standardized rubric. As such, it responds to concerns about fairness and consistency and tests students’ self-reported gains in learning documented in recent studies. Across criteria, the study found minimal differences in learning by grading approach. In addition to providing comparative findings from one writing program, this study outlines a replicable methodology for future research.