Nontraditional Grading at the Nexus of Business, Communication, and Composition

Abstract

This article explores factors influencing classroom assessment approaches by analyzing survey data from 326 U.S. college instructors teaching business, communication, and composition. Business and communication instructors adopt nontraditional grading methods far less than composition instructors. Departmental culture and disciplinary norms are major influences, along with constraints like class size, time, and technology. The article argues that instructors can and should question departmental grading norms to develop assessment methods that enhance learning in interdisciplinary courses like business communication.

Journal
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Published
2026-01-16
DOI
10.1177/23294906251399571
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (3)

  1. Rhetoric Review
  2. College Composition and Communication
  3. Rhetoric Review
Also cites 21 works outside this index ↓
  1. Cain J. Medina M. Romanelli F. Persky A. (2022). Deficiencies of traditional grading systems and recommendati…
  2. Carillo E. C. (2021). The hidden inequities in labor-based contract grading. University Press of Colorado. ht…
  3. Carless D. To J. Kwan C. Kwok J. (2023). Disciplinary perspectives on feedback processes: Towards signature f…
  4. Chollet M. Marsella S. Scherer S. (2022). Training public speaking with virtual social interactions: Effectiv…
  5. Elbow P. (1997). Grading student writing: Making it simpler fairer clearer. New Directions for Teaching and L…
  6. Fielding J. Fielding N. Hughes G. (2013). Opening up open-ended survey data using qualitative software. Quali…
  7. Froehlich D. E. Guias D. (2021). Multimodal video-feedback: A promising way of giving Feedback on student res…
  8. Gartner W. B. (1993). Dr. Deming comes to class. Journal of Management Education 17(2) 143–158. https://doi.o…
  9. Henderson M. Phillips M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian J…
  10. 10.37514/PER-B.2019.0216.0
  11. Inoue A. B. (2024). University Press of Colorado—Cripping labor-based grading for more equity in literacy cou…
  12. Johnson M. (2022). Grading for process: Using the portfolio to emphasize process in technical communication […
  13. 10.1002/9781118447895.ch11
  14. 10.58680/ej201324253
  15. 10.7330/9781607328032
  16. 10.7330/9781607328032.c001
  17. Nilson L. B. (2023). Specifications grading: Restoring rigor motivating students and saving faculty time (1st…
  18. Rivera J. Groleau T. (2021). Student and faculty transformations from teaching wicked geography problems: A j…
  19. Sorensen-Unruh C. (2024). The ungrading learning theory we have is not the ungrading learning theory we need.…
  20. Tierney W. G. (2023). The impact of culture on organizational decision-making: Theory and practice in higher …
  21. Vaughn P. Turner C. (2016). Decoding via coding: Analyzing qualitative text data through thematic coding and …
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network →