Eliminate Extra Credit¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 1 claim (1 for) · 2 studies (1 causal, 1 theoretical), q3 · 0 of 2 report an effect size

Description¶

Eliminating extra credit means designing a grading scheme in which every point available to any student is available to all students, and every graded task maps directly to the required curriculum. Extra credit — optional, supplemental tasks offered to raise a grade — is removed because it typically rewards students who already have surplus time, transportation, money, and family support, and because it distorts the meaning of the grade as a measure of learning.

Design Implications¶

Grades function best as transparent signals of mastery; optional add-on tasks contaminate that signal by letting non-learning factors (availability, privilege, grade anxiety) move the number [~M]. Eliminating extra credit pushes the design burden onto the core curriculum: if students need more opportunities to demonstrate learning, those opportunities must be built into the required course structure — revisions, retakes, or Assessment for learning — rather than bolted on as bonus work.

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A complete, well-aligned set of required assessments that adequately samples the curriculum, so no student needs extra credit to succeed
• Clear communication with students and families about why extra credit is being removed and what legitimate grade-recovery paths replace it
• A grading policy that separates academic achievement from behavior and effort, so the removal of extra credit does not simply shift inequity into subjective points

Constraints¶

• Students who genuinely need more time or more attempts lose a perceived safety net; without structured alternatives (retakes, revisions), elimination can increase grade anxiety and learned helplessness [-M]
• In systems where grades gate scholarships, athletics, or advancement, removing extra credit without policy coordination can disadvantage students mid-transition [~W]
• Instructors may use extra credit as a classroom-management or engagement lever; removing it requires replacing those motivational functions with intrinsic supports such as Check-Ins and relevant, authentic tasks [~M]

Implementation Variability¶

• Replace extra credit with universal grade-improvement mechanisms: revision policies, retake windows, or dropping the lowest score — available to everyone on the same terms
• Convert "bonus" content into required enrichment for all (e.g., an optional museum report becomes a class visit or a curated virtual tour with a shared task)
• Phase out gradually: stop announcing new extra credit while honoring existing commitments

Target Learners¶

• All learners, but the change disproportionately benefits students from low-income backgrounds, working students, caregivers, and those without transportation or discretionary funds — groups for whom extra credit is structurally inaccessible [~M]
• Grade-anxious high achievers, who often over-invest in point accumulation rather than learning; shifting to mastery-oriented grading supports process focus Process goals outperform outcome goals for novices. [+M]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Equity of opportunity: ensuring grades reflect curriculum mastery, not resource access
• Valid assessment: maintaining the interpretive meaning of grades as achievement signals
• Motivation: redirecting effort from point-chasing toward understanding

Instructions¶

1. Audit current extra credit offerings and identify what learning, if any, each one certifies; discard tasks that certify only time and resources.
2. Map required assessments to curriculum outcomes to confirm every student has sufficient opportunity to demonstrate mastery (Assessment, Assessment for Learning).
3. Replace the safety-net function of extra credit with universal recovery structures — revisions, retakes, or Rubrics-guided resubmission — offered on identical terms to all students.
4. Communicate the rationale to students and families, framing grades as measures of the curriculum rather than of accumulated effort.
5. Monitor grade distributions across demographic groups after implementation to verify the change is narrowing, not widening, gaps.

Related Strategies¶

• Standards-Based Grading — the broader grading philosophy this strategy typically accompanies
• Eliminate Group Grades — a companion move toward grades that reflect individual learning

Examples¶

• A biology course replaces "attend a museum and write a report for 5 bonus points" with a required in-class analysis of a virtual museum collection, so the same content is available to students who cannot travel or pay admission.
• A district grading policy (in the spirit of Feldman's Grading for Equity) bans extra credit and instead allows any student to retake a major assessment within two weeks, with the retake score replacing the original.

Key Sources¶

• Feldman, J. (2019). Grading for equity: What it is, why it matters, and how it can transform schools and classrooms. Corwin.
• Guskey, T. R. (2011). Five obstacles to grading reform. Educational Leadership, 69(3), 16–21.
• Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD.
• Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. Jossey-Bass.