This experience report documents an attempt at embracing the ``A’s for all'' and equitable grading frameworks in an introductory, proof writing-based discrete mathematics course for computer science majors (with N=138 students) at a medium-sized research-oriented university in the US. Unlike in introductory programming contexts, there is so far no reliable automated grading system that gives formative and adaptive feedback supporting the scope of a proof-based discrete mathematics course. We therefore faced the unique challenge of being unable to automate all assessments and directly offer all students unlimited attempts toward mastery.

To address this issue, we adopted a hybrid approach in designing our formative assessments. Using the Exemplary, Satisfactory, Not Yet, and Unassessable (ESNU) discrete grading model, we required all students to get a Satisfactory or above in every question in every assignment within two rounds of human feedback. Students not meeting the goal after two attempts then consulted with course staff members in one-on-one interactions to get diagnostic feedback at any time at their convenience until the semester ended.

We document our course policy design in detail, then present data that summarizes both the grading outcomes and student sentiments. We also discuss the lessons learned from our initiative and the necessary staff-side management practices that support our design. This report outlines an example of adopting the A’s for all and equitable grading framework in a course context where not all contents can be made autogradable or where open-ended authentic assessments are of interest.