Antony Eagle

Antony Eagle

Anonymous Grading


Higher education as a hostile environment

Controversial Explanations

Addressing Potential Disciplinary Hostility

Improving Classroom Practice


Anonymity and Fairness

Anonymous Assessment

Why Adopt Anonymous Assessment?

Why Anonymous Assessment?

  1. Fairness
  2. Accuracy
  3. Compliance

Fairness for students

Protection for Staff

Improved Validity

Better Compliance



  1. Unreliability
  2. ‘I want to see student’s work in the context of their growth over the semester’; relatedly, ‘I want to assess students, not assignments’
  3. ‘I think the idea of objective assignment “quality” is a construct, itself harming students. Anonymous grading reinforces it, and stops me from mitigating it’
  4. ‘What about students with disability accommodations or other needs that should be recognised in assessment?’


Assessing Students

Objective Standards

Special Circumstances


Baron, Sam, Tom Dougherty, and Kristie Miller (2015) ‘Why Is There Female Under-Representation Among Philosophy Majors?’, Ergo 2: 329–65. doi:10.3998/ergo.12405314.0002.014.
Benétreau-Dupin, Yann and Guillaume Beaulac (2015) ‘Fair Numbers: What Data Can and Cannot Tell Us about the Underrepresentation of Women in Philosophy’, Ergo 2: 59–81. doi:10.3998/ergo.12405314.0002.003.
Carrington, Paul D (1992) One Law: The Role of Legal Education in the Opening of the Legal Profession Since 1776, Florida Law Review 44: 501–603.
Dodds, Susan and Eliza Goddard (2013) ‘Not Just a Pipeline Problem: Improving Women’s Participation in Philosophy in Australia’, in Katrina Hutchison and Fiona Jenkins, eds., Women in Philosophy: What Needs to Change? 143–63. Oxford University Press.
Dorsey, J K and J A Colliver (1995) ‘Effect of Anonymous Test Grading on Passing Rates as Related to Gender and Race’, Academic Medicine 70: 321–3. doi:10.1097/00001888-199504000-00017.
Dougherty, Tom, Samuel Baron, and Kristie Miller (2015) ‘Female Under-Representation Among Philosophy Majors: A Map of the Hypotheses and a Survey of the Evidence’, Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 1. doi:10.5206/fpq/2015.1.4.
Haslanger, Sally (2008) ‘Changing the Ideology and Culture of Philosophy: Not by Reason (Alone)’, Hypatia 23: 210–23. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2008.tb01195.x.
Leslie, Sarah-Jane, Andrei Cimpian, Meredith Meyer, and Edward Freeland (2015) ‘Expectations of Brilliance Underlie Gender Distributions Across Academic Disciplines’, Science 347: 262–5. doi:10.1126/science.1261375.
Moulton, Janice (1989) ‘A Paradigm of Philosophy: The Adversary Method’, in Ann Garry and Marilyn Pearsall, eds., Women, Knowledge Reality: Explorations in Feminist Philosophy: 5–20. Routledge.
Price, Paul C, Rajiv Jhangiani, and I-Chant A Chiang (2015) Research Methods in Psychology. BCcampus.
Steele, Claude M (1997) ‘A Threat in the Air: How Stereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity and Performance’, American Psychologist 52: 613–29. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.52.6.613.
Steele, Jennifer, Jacquelyn B James, and Rosalind Chait Barnett (2002) ‘Learning in a Man’s World: Examining the Perceptions of Undergraduate Women in Male-Dominated Academic Areas’, Psychology of Women Quarterly 26: 46–50. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00042.