What do you think?
Rate this book
WAC Clearinghouse
Labor-Based Grading Contracts: Building Equity and Inclusion in the Compassionate Writing Classroom
In Labor-Based Grading Contracts, Asao B. Inoue argues for the use of labor-based grading contracts along with compassionate practices to determine course grades as a way to do social justice work with students. He frames this practice by considering how Freirean problem-posing led him to experiment with grading contracts and explore the literature on grading contracts. Inoue offers a robust Marxian theory of labor that considers Hannah Arendt's theory of labor-work-action and Barbara Adam's concept of "timescapes." The heart of the book details the theoretical and practical ways labor-based grading contracts can be used and assessed for effectiveness in classrooms and programs. Inoue concludes the book by moving outside the classroom, considering how assessing writing in the socially just ways he offers in the book may provide a way to address the violence and discord seen in the world today.
356 pages, ebook
Published January 1, 2019
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
May 21, 2020
I picked this up after a colleague recommended it after seeing the author present on the topic, so I was really excited to read this and expecting to love it. Alas.
When the author was talking about his own experiences and things he's really knowledgeable about, I was vibing with it. When he was talking about things like metacognition and how reflection is work, and therefore should be counted as labor in this grading style, I appreciated it.
Unfortunately, he spent most of the book trying to persuade me of the value of labor-based grading using poorly researched arguments that I found frustrating to read through. Cherry picking elements of Marx and Rawls (there's a combo I wouldn't expect!) and also so much Gladwell. So much Gladwell. Even after admitting that Gladwell's own cherry-picked research has been widely criticized for promoting inaccurate "facts" he continued to use Gladwell as justification. (So much eyerolling in these parts.)
In terms of justifying this type of labor-based grading contract based on his own experiences, it was a mixed bag. He has a whole chapter talking about how evaluating effectiveness in this area is hard and potentially meaningless before concluding that students of color spend more time working in his classes than white students do. But in an earlier chapter he talked about how students who are most likely to succeed in his classes are international students (often privileged members of dominant cultures in their own countries) but Black men don't do well. So. I don't know what to make of this all.
Through most of the book he drops little pieces of awareness of the existence of disabled students, and has a section in one chapter about how this method has been criticized for not being inclusive of non-neurotypical students (one of my major concerns when reading the text as well). He says that it's actually helpful, but his explanation doesn't actually make sense if you know anything about the topic. As when he was talking about teaching metta meditation to his students without apparent awareness that people with unaddressed trauma histories can be triggered by this sort of activity, I don't think he knows enough about this stuff to know that he doesn't know. It worries me a bit for his students. (I also worry about students in classes with conventional grading systems.)
I finish the book thinking that the idea of labor-based grading contracts does have potential. But the poorly-researched arguments and unaddressed concerns leave me hesitant.
When the author was talking about his own experiences and things he's really knowledgeable about, I was vibing with it. When he was talking about things like metacognition and how reflection is work, and therefore should be counted as labor in this grading style, I appreciated it.
Unfortunately, he spent most of the book trying to persuade me of the value of labor-based grading using poorly researched arguments that I found frustrating to read through. Cherry picking elements of Marx and Rawls (there's a combo I wouldn't expect!) and also so much Gladwell. So much Gladwell. Even after admitting that Gladwell's own cherry-picked research has been widely criticized for promoting inaccurate "facts" he continued to use Gladwell as justification. (So much eyerolling in these parts.)
In terms of justifying this type of labor-based grading contract based on his own experiences, it was a mixed bag. He has a whole chapter talking about how evaluating effectiveness in this area is hard and potentially meaningless before concluding that students of color spend more time working in his classes than white students do. But in an earlier chapter he talked about how students who are most likely to succeed in his classes are international students (often privileged members of dominant cultures in their own countries) but Black men don't do well. So. I don't know what to make of this all.
Through most of the book he drops little pieces of awareness of the existence of disabled students, and has a section in one chapter about how this method has been criticized for not being inclusive of non-neurotypical students (one of my major concerns when reading the text as well). He says that it's actually helpful, but his explanation doesn't actually make sense if you know anything about the topic. As when he was talking about teaching metta meditation to his students without apparent awareness that people with unaddressed trauma histories can be triggered by this sort of activity, I don't think he knows enough about this stuff to know that he doesn't know. It worries me a bit for his students. (I also worry about students in classes with conventional grading systems.)
I finish the book thinking that the idea of labor-based grading contracts does have potential. But the poorly-researched arguments and unaddressed concerns leave me hesitant.
August 1, 2021
I have been doing a lot of research recently for my thesis on antiracist writing pedagogies. A professor recommended Asao Inoue and I picked up this read. I am so glad that I did. I believe that the way we grade creates an inequitable experience and I believe Inoue is on to something here. I have to tweak some of his contract to fit the secondary classroom, but I am definitely approaching my principal to give this a try.
Read
January 5, 2023This argument for an alternative grading system is quite thorough and generally well theorized. I was somewhat skeptical of key components at first but it largely won me over by the end. There are still structural weaknesses and losers to this approach, but I think it’s better than the status quo and can be further developed to address some of its weaknesses, for instance for students with disabilities or time-intensive external obligations.
September 8, 2020
This was very helpful in understanding why labor-based grading contracts are successful & helped me and my colleagues develop one for our own courses.
Shelved as 'partly-read'
November 16, 2020I feel remorseful that I didn't take this approach when teaching this year. Hopefully I can remedy this soon.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews