I haven’t really seen grading presented as an ableist practice, but after attending a workshop at UMass, I can see how framing it that way illustrates the problems of grading in a thought-provoking way. Why ableist? Here’s an analogy: I’m certainly not *able* to contend with the top archers in the nation, but no one is forcing me to, either. It’s a choice. My lack of ability doesn’t close any doors. I just won’t win a medal. Yet elementary and secondary school is not an option for kids. Placing grading obstacles in the way of their learning and future learning is a bit like disallowing me to go to my local archery range until I were to place among the top athletes in the nation. So, consider these common characteristics of graded assignments as we unpack each one through an ableist perspective:

• single standard of achievement
• don’t acknowledge growth
• require specific patterns of logical thought
• require fast work on deadlines
• only valid in written form
• require fast, dense reading
• require screen time

Single Standard
Whether something is graded as done/not done, it requires certain things to be included, or it has a rubric specifying performance/quality, there’s usually just one standard. Quite literally, then, the students able to meet that standard receive a higher grade than those unable. Of course, a student’s ability can fluctuate, and certainly isn’t fixed, but when a teacher says “here’s how to get 100,” and a student is still in the learning process (and hasn’t developed that ability yet), they’re outta luck.

Don’t Acknowledge Growth
Similar to my gripes with “mastery” within standards-based grading (SBG) systems, meeting the standard of a graded assignment is really all that matters, not how the student meets it, or how much they’ve improved TOWARDS it! The student who’s already able succeeds. The student who’s made gains, but remains unable does not.

Specific Patterns of Thought
This is basically the whole “show your work!” requirement often in math. There are times when a teacher wants to know the thought process (…or are they just afraid Chat GPT did the work?). Then again, there are times when a student is able to calculate so quickly that writing out each step is a burden. The result is that they’re often punished, as if they’re unable to think the way a teacher wants them to. The same goes for grading translations when students otherwise are able to just READ a text much faster! Students also have very creative, rare, even unique ways of thinking. This could be cultural, as well. Conformity in this way is ableist.

Crunch Time
This one comes across as the most salient to me. Regardless of how well people may work on time management, some are certainly more able to meet deadlines than others. You know which adults show up to work late, all the time, and which adults never seem to get their work in by a certain date. Now remember we’re talking about students. Assignments are often graded not on students demonstrating their understanding—as they should be—rather their punctuality, or their learning rate. Students who are able to meet deadlines succeed. Those unable do not.

Writing Only
This one’s big, and gets into being culturally responsive, too. Refusing to accept something like an oral defense in place of graded written work is ableist. Some students can craft a logical argument in real time, yet they’re often punished, as if they’re unable to demonstrate their understanding the way the teacher wants them to.

Dense Reading
Students go from learning how to read to then reading in order to learn. Some academic texts are quite dense, especially for multilingual students. Grading assignments requiring dense reading hurts those unable to read academic language at faster rates.

Screen Time
If I told you the number of students I had each year who requested (or didn’t request because of embarrassment) to be seated near the board BECAUSE their family didn’t get them glasses, you’d be shocked. In addition to obvious parental control limits on device time, we know that looking at screens for extended time isn’t that great. Requiring a significant amount of screen use (vs. a physical option) is ableist, especially for the most vulnerable students who don’t have basic eye care needs being met.