Rethinking assessment in large lecture economics courses

This paper examines associations between shifting from high-stakes exams to more frequent, lower-stakes assessment in large-enrollment introductory economics courses. Using Canvas data from two instructors who redesigned their courses and institutional records covering 13,137 students, we analyze grade distributions, pass rates, and progression into Intermediate Microeconomics, supplemented by survey evidence on retention. Redesigned assessment structures were associated with redistribution toward higher grades, stable pass rates, and modestly higher continuation into subsequent coursework, while retention outcomes appeared broadly comparable across formats. Implementation heterogeneity, including a descriptive comparison in which frequency increased without drop-lowest provisions, suggests frequency plays a key role, though simultaneous policy changes preclude causal attribution. These findings represent suggestive descriptive evidence, not causal estimates, warranting further research to disentangle individual policy components.