• Don’t grade everything. Think carefully about the difference between feedback for growth and development and grading for assessment. For example, in-class student response systems allow for immediate feedback. They can also help expose misconceptions that instructors can address with the whole class rather than responding to each student’s submission.
• Narrow your focus: Rather than providing feedback on all aspects of an assignment, focus on 2-3 essential skills or sets of knowledge.
• Do not edit student work: Consider limiting the amount of commentary you offer on student work. Focus instead on overall strengths and weaknesses and on patterns (e.g., repeated errors). You can also use a feedback form to structure your commentary. See also this Sweetland resource on Providing Feedback and Grades to Second Language Students
• Use rubrics: A rubric is a tool that outlines how an instructor will approach grading, including aspects of a student’s work to be evaluated, evaluation criteria, and levels of scoring. They can be particularly helpful for written work (including papers, essays, and even short answers) as well as projects. If a rubric is well constructed, with clear definitions of each performance level, you can return student work with a copy of the rubric circling the appropriate performance level. The Sweetland Center for Writing has developed a number of resources to guide instructors in the development and implementation of rubrics.
• Incorporate peer and self assessments. By having clear rubrics and practice, students can provide useful feedback, decrease instructor workload, and develop important metacognitive skills.
• Leverage IT. Several tools are available in Canvas to assist with testing and grading. For example, Speedgrader enables you to grade and comment without having to download each submission. Gradescope has several features valuable for assessment in large courses. New Quizzes allows you to create a variety of questions types, and students can take quizzes within Canvas. Rubrics lets you create customized rubrics in Canvas which then appear in Speed Grader. 
• Time your grading. After grading a few submissions, determine a reasonable time limit and stick to it for grading the rest. Consider setting a timer to help you stick to the this limit.
• Implement changes to assessment practices slowly: Start small when making changes to your approach to grading. For example, pilot a new approach with a small course or seminar before implementing it in a large course. Or, when considering alternative assessment approaches (e.g., gameful learning), try out that approach on one assignment to test out how it could be applied more broadly in subsequent offerings. David Clark has compiled a selection of small changes to assessments that instructors can make in their courses.
• Don’t work in isolation: Seek out colleagues who have implemented similar approaches or might be interested in discussing how to make changes effectively. You can also follow this link to set up an appointment to speak with a CRLT consultant.

There is solid evidence that the use of more frequent assessments rather than one or two high stakes tests leads to better learning outcomes. For example, the testing effect refers to evidence showing that actively retrieving information leads to longer-term retention than simply studying material (Karpicke & Blunt, 2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborate studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199327). In addition, frequent assessments allow for more regular feedback, and they also decrease the pressure on students to perform well on any given assignment or test.

That said, when testing or assignments become too frequent, the workload can become overwhelming for students and feel like “busy work.” It can also lead to increased anxiety and a focus on grades over learning. Finding the right balance is the key, as Robert Talbert writes in his blogpost on this topic.

Finding the right balance in assessment is more art than science, and it’s clear that neither over-assessment nor under-assessment is the ideal path. The key is to design a thoughtful and flexible approach that allows for both frequent feedback and the opportunity for students to reflect and improve without feeling overwhelmed. It’s essential to consider not just the frequency of assessments but also their quality, the opportunities for reattempts, and the overall learning experience. By carefully adjusting the cadence and being open to alternative forms of assessment, we can foster a more effective and supportive environment for student learning. Ultimately, the goal is to create a space where assessments serve their true purpose: to help students grow and deepen their understanding, without adding unnecessary stress to their educational journey.

A specific suggestion they make is to design a minimal cadence of assessment and then add extra opportunities as needed. This allows for a balance in which no individual assignment carries too much weight, while avoiding a “quiz culture” that exacerbates student focus on grades rather than learning:

The semester following the one I described earlier [i.e., using weekly quizzes], I dialed back the quiz schedule to every other week, then used the 12-week plan to use almost all of the last two weeks of the semester for additional reattempts as needed …I was worried at first that cutting the frequency in half would severely curtail student performance, but in fact there was almost no impact at all, and the “quiz culture” went away. Later, I dialed it back even further to monthly assessments with extra reattempts in the last two weeks, and I have found this to be far less work for everyone and just as effective for students. (You can always schedule “extra” attempts if you start with a minimal schedule; but you cannot start with a full schedule and then remove attempts.)

References

Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborate studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199327

Talbert, R. (March 3, 2025). Navigating the challenges of assessment frequency. Grading for Growth.