Photo credit: hechingerreport.org

Alphabetical Grading Bias in Education: The Hidden Impact on Students

For students whose surnames start with letters toward the end of the alphabet, like Wilson or Ziegler, the challenge of attaining high grades in college may be compounded by an unsuspecting factor: grading order. A recent study from the University of Michigan reveals that students with last names listed later in the alphabet often receive lower grades when assessments are marked in alphabetical order, a function inherent in many learning management systems (LMS), such as Canvas.

In the past decade, the landscape of grading has shifted significantly. Gone are the days of physical assignments being left on a table. Today, students submit their work online via LMS platforms, where they can access course materials, submit assignments, and even complete exams. Instructors utilize these platforms to grade submissions, which are typically organized in alphabetical order by last name, meaning that a student like Adams will be graded before Baker, and so on, down the list.

The research team, led by Helen Wang, a doctoral candidate at the University of Michigan, examined over 30 million grades from a large institution employing Canvas and found a concerning trend. Surnames beginning with U through Z were graded, on average, about 0.6 points lower on a 100-point scale compared to students with last names starting from A to E. While this penalty may seem minimal, the accumulation of these points over time can result in significant differences in final grades, potentially affecting students’ academic trajectories.

The study, documented in a 2024 draft paper currently under revision for the journal Management Science, highlights this grading bias across various disciplines. Interestingly, the discrepancy was more acute in the social sciences and humanities than in fields like engineering and medicine.

Beyond the numerical grades, the study also uncovered that students at the bottom of the alphabetical list tend to receive harsher feedback. Comments directed to these students were often more negative or abrupt, while their counterparts at the top often received encouraging remarks. This difference in feedback could contribute to a cyclical disadvantage for students with last names starting later in the alphabet.

Though the researchers were unable to definitively pinpoint the underlying reasons for this grading bias, they posited that it may stem from the fatigue and mental strain experienced by instructors—many of whom are graduate students—who grade numerous assignments in succession. This fatigue could lead to a decline in grading consistency. Furthermore, it was suggested that instructors might unconsciously adjust their grading standards if they have awarded several high marks in a row, making it even more challenging for students at the bottom of the alphabetical scale.

Some educators have recognized this potential bias and have actively sought solutions. For instance, one instructor proposed a feature to the Canvas platform that would randomly present submissions for grading, thereby mitigating fatigue-driven bias. In response to growing awareness around this issue, Canvas introduced an option to randomize the grading order in May 2024, a shift that was partly motivated by the findings of the University of Michigan study.

However, the default setting for grading remains alphabetical, necessitating that instructors consciously choose to alter it. This default may not effectively highlight the availability of alternative grading methods, thus continuing the risk of bias against students with last names that start later in the alphabet.

Ultimately, the implications of this study extend beyond just Canvas. Many leading LMS platforms implement similar alphabetical sorting features, indicating that this issue could be widespread across various educational institutions. The urgency of addressing grading bias is clear, especially as educators strive to ensure fairness and equity in academic evaluation.

The conversation initiated by this research is crucial for fostering a more equitable educational environment, addressing the structural concerns that influence grading and, by extension, student success.

Source
hechingerreport.org