This study investigated students' and a course coordinator's perceptions about specifications (spec) grading in a cardiovascular systems course and assessed its effects on student performance. Spec grading was hypothesized to result in lower perceived student stress about the course, improved student performance, and less work for the course coordinator. The study used a mixed methods approach consisting of student pre-, peri-, and post-course surveys; student focus group interviews; analysis of student course evaluations; and course coordinator reflection. Participants were from a cross-section of one course in the veterinary professional curriculum. Results demonstrated significantly more A grades assigned to students than in the previous year's course, where traditional grading was used (p = .024). The focus group produced two primary themes: pros and cons. Pros included flexibility, student control over grades, generally lower perceived stress, opportunities to resubmit assignments, and more motivation to learn. Cons included confusion about the process, some disorganization, perceived higher workload for the professor, and communication concerns. The course coordinator's positive perceptions included students being less combative about grades than with the traditional system, students appreciating opportunities to resubmit assignments, and students demonstrating improved learning outcomes. Negative course coordinator perceptions were that reduced student stress was inconsistently achieved and that there was increased time commitment compared with traditional grading. Course evaluation themes included skepticism about spec grading in the beginning, varying stress experiences, improved learning, and increased workload. In conclusion, spec grading variably reduced student stress and did not result in less work for the course coordinator.
Keywords: alternative assessment; course grading; mixed methods; specifications grading; veterinary medical education.