FIG 3 Comparison of final course grades and quality of final projects in 2021 (ungraded) and 2018 (traditionally graded). No significant difference was observed in either measurement.
ABSTRACT Traditional grading practices in undergraduate science education have been criticized for emphasizing compliance and performance over authentic learning and scientific inquiry. Although ungrading has gained attention as an alternative assessment strategy, evidence from upper-level STEM laboratory courses remains limited. Here, we evaluated a fully ungraded assessment model in a third-year project-based biology laboratory course at a large Canadian research university. Grades and point-based assessments were replaced with formative feedback, student-generated learning goals, reflective practice, and end-of-term self-assessment. Qualitative responses from 93 students were analyzed using inductive thematic coding. Students most frequently reported decreased stress, increased enjoyment, greater focus on learning rather than grades, increased motivation, and a safer environment for experimentation and risk-taking. Comparisons with traditionally graded laboratory courses similarly empha sized reduced anxiety and greater engagement with learning. To assess academic outcomes, 20 final manuscripts from the ungraded cohort and 20 from previously graded cohorts were evaluated blindly using a 16-variable scientific writing rubric. No significant differences were detected in manuscript quality or final course grades between graded and ungraded cohorts. These findings suggest that ungrading can improve student experience and foster intrinsic motivation in upper-level biology laboratories without diminishing learning outcomes.