Speaker
Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results
Participants will examine how structured second chances can increase assignment completion and encourage students to engage with feedback while maintaining clear academic consequences. The session demonstrates how the framework helps struggling students recover early in the semester while preventing patterns of prolonged disengagement. Attendees will leave with practical strategies for implementing revision opportunities, defining eligibility thresholds, and communicating expectations clearly. The presentation also discusses observed student responses and practical considerations when applying the model in first-year university courses.
Abstract section 1: Relevance
Universities increasingly enroll students with diverse academic preparation, creating pressure for instructors to balance support with accountability. Research on mastery learning, specifications grading, and labor-based grading contracts suggests that structured revision opportunities can improve engagement and learning while reducing anxiety about failure (Bloom, 1968; Nilson, 2015; Inoue, 2019). However, unlimited flexibility can weaken academic expectations. This presentation responds to that tension by presenting a structured model that offers early opportunities for revision and support while establishing clear performance thresholds that determine whether students can continue toward a passing grade.
Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions
This practice-oriented presentation introduces a course design that integrates structured second chances with a clearly defined failure threshold. The presentation addresses the following questions:
1) How can instructors provide meaningful revision opportunities that support student learning?
2) At what point should a course establish firm consequences for continued non-participation?
3) How can grading systems balance compassion for developing students with clear academic standards?
Abstract section 3: Content/method
The presentation outlines a grading framework implemented in first-year university writing courses. Early assignments allow revisions, resubmissions, and structured feedback cycles. Participation checkpoints and completion requirements establish minimum engagement levels. A mid-semester eligibility threshold determines whether students remain on a passing trajectory. The session explains the grading structure, assignment design, and communication strategies used to ensure that expectations remain transparent to students.
Abstract section 5: References
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1–12.
Inoue, A. B. (2019). Labor-based grading contracts: Building equity and inclusion in the compassionate writing classroom. WAC Clearinghouse.
Nilson, L. B. (2015). Specifications grading: Restoring rigor, motivating students, and saving faculty time. Stylus.
| Title | Second Chances vs Knowning When to Quit |
|---|---|
| Teaching Context | College and university education |