Purpose Despite a growing awareness of instructional practices that support student learning and well-being, higher education classrooms tend to still be dominated by the use of rigid approaches to assessment and course design. This study aims to understand the experiences of students in courses that implement a universal design for learning (UDL) pedagogical approach and an ungrading assessment approach. Design/methodology/approach Leveraging a qualitative methodological approach, authors interviewed 13 graduate students in two library and information science technology courses and 11 undergraduate students in a computer science course in discrete mathematics about their experiences with ungrading within the context of UDL-designed courses. Interviews were inductively and collectively coded. Findings Analysis of data revealed three major themes: students reported that an ungrading approach reduced their stress and anxiety within the class context; students reported the ungrading approach encouraged them to focus on learning over perfection; and students reported finding it difficult to detach themselves from the idea that grades are a measure of their worthiness, even though they recognized the social construction of the grading system itself. Research limitations/implications As a qualitative study, the findings cannot be generalized. However, the study highlights student perspectives on ungrading and is further unique in that the context takes place in STEM courses that implement UDL principles. Originality/value Given the freedom that higher education instructors and professors typically have to design their courses at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, relatively little is known about how students experience alternative types of pedagogical approaches and assessment methods. This study offers first-person student perspectives on the use of two approaches – UDL and Ungrading – that are gaining momentum in both education scholarship and best practice related to what is known about how people learn.
Burns et al. (Mon,) studied this question.