[EAS]Curbing Grade Inflation

[pjk]

Mail*Link¨ SMTP               Curbing Grade Inflation

Dear Colleagues -

Grade inflation, or more accurately, grade compression (where
everything collapses into the A to A- range), is a serious problem,
and makes engineering and science courses (and majors) be seen as
the higher risk educational path by grade-conscious students.

This short article from ASEE Prism is more intended as reminder than
as a source of novel remedies, though communication within
Engineering about grading policies deserves more attention than it
has been getting. Beyond that, our grading policies are embedded in
the larger institutional context that certainly reflects the
article's opening statement (and my own pre-1958 high school days):

> In 1966, just over 15 percent of first-year college students carried
> "A" averages in high school. By 2001, the portion had jumped to 44 
> percent, according to an annual UCLA survey of college freshmen.

It almost seems as if it has become politically incorrect to give
significantly lower grades for significantly inferior work, as if a
B or less opened some Pandora's box of complexities, of extenuating
circumstances, potential complaints, and ruined chances for
professional school acceptance. Yet it is often the lower grades
that have quite simple causes, and the best grades that have the
richest complexity of intellectual curiosity, creative and
analytical modes of thinking, all those rareties that deserve a more
explicit reward structure than a bland A. Sigh.

   --PJK

--------------------------------------
Date: 11/28/02 4:51 AM
From: Rick Reis

"For uniformity and fairness, faculty members should discuss grading 
and share grade distributions for each course. We know professors who 
want to give lower grades but don't because they think everyone else 
is awarding higher grades."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
		         TOMORROW'S PROFESSOR(SM) LISTSERV
	       "desk-top faculty development, one hundred times a year"
             THE STANFORD UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING
		                 http://ctl.stanford.edu

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Folks:

The posting below presents some useful suggestions on dealing with 
grade inflation.  It is by Phillip Wankat and Frank Oreovicz, in ASEE 
Prism, October, 2002, Volume 12, Number 2 
<http://www.asee.org/prism/>. Copyright © 2002 ASEE, all rights 
reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Phillip Wankat is head of interdisciplinary engineering and the 
Clifton L. Lovell Distinguished Professor of chemical engineering at 
Purdue University. Frank Oreovicz is an education communications 
specialist at Purdue's chemical engineering school. They can be 
reached by e-mail at purdue at asee.org.


Regards,

Rick Reis
reis at stanford.edu
UP NEXT: A Collaborative Model for Leading Academic Change

			      Tomorrow's Teaching and Learning

		------------------------ 654 words ----------------------------

			        CURBING GRADE INFLATION

Students learn more when the grades they get accurately reflect what
they've learned in the course.

In 1966, just over 15 percent of first-year college students carried
"A" averages in high school. By 2001, the portion had jumped to 44 
percent, according to an annual UCLA survey of college freshmen. 
Ironically, those high grades require few hours of study. Nearly 85 
percent of high school seniors spend 10 hours per week or less on 
homework. Clearly, there is grade inflation in high schools, and 
students entering college expect to continue getting high marks.

And they do. High percentages of college students graduate college 
with honors these days. Even graduating with a 4.0 is no longer 
unusual. Yet, according to the National Surveys of Student 
Engagement, another large study, the amount of time that college 
students spend hitting the books outside of class doesn't coincide 
with their good grades. Only 21 percent of college seniors spend
more  than 20 hours per week preparing for class.

We believe that students learn best when grades accurately reflect 
their achievement. Grade inflation can be controlled by establishing
certain procedures, such as a standard grading scale. For example,
90  percent and above is an “A", 80 to 90 percent is a “B", 70 to 80
percent is a “C", and 60 to 70 percent is a “D". For an “A", the
work  should be outstanding, and to receive a “B", it must be of 
professional quality. In your syllabus, define your grading scale
and  refer to it during the semester.

Although there shouldn't be much wiggle room, you do have to be 
flexible when there is good reason. For example, if a majority of 
students fare poorly on an exam and complain that it was too 
difficult-which often means they did not have enough time to
complete  it-you can adjust all the test scores upwards by revamping
the  grading scale. For instance, if the highest grade in the class
was an  88 (out of a possible 100), you might add 12 points to every
score.

If test averages for the year are between 30 to 50 percent or lower,
up to three-quarters of the class could flunk. It is obviously best
to give exams that are of reasonable length and difficulty, but
final  grades can be adjusted to reflect the reasonably achievable
score in  the course. You can determine this score from the second
or third  highest grade in the course. Thus, if one outstanding
student  achieves 882 points during the semester (out of a possible
1000), but  the next two highest scores are 698 and 690, use 698.
(Give the  student with 882 points an “A+" and ask him or her to do
a research  project with you.) Then award grades based on the
grading scale you  choose, starting with 698 as the highest
achievable score, rather  than 1000. For example, if you use a
90-80-70-60 A-B-C-D scale, the  lowest passing grade becomes 60
percent of 698 or 419 points. A more  generous 80-70-60-50 scale
(with the lowest passing grade at 349  points) uses the “50 percent"
rule, in which students must earn at  least 50 percent of the
achievable score to pass the course.

For uniformity and fairness, faculty members should discuss grading 
and share grade distributions for each course. We know professors
who  want to give lower grades but don't because they think everyone
else  is awarding higher grades.

We should also stop punishing students in departments that control 
grade inflation. Basing university honors and other awards strictly 
on GPA puts students in those departments at a disadvantage.
Graduate  and professional schools and companies that hire new
engineers must  allow for differences in institutional quality and
grading standards  when ranking those all-important admissions or
hiring decisions.

Grade inflation, like inflation in the economy, can be controlled. 
Perhaps universities need to follow the lead of the Federal Reserve,
whose primary function is to keep inflation in check.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
TOMORROW'S PROFESSOR LISTSERV is a shared mission partnership with the
American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) http://www.aahe.org/
The National Teaching and Learning Forum (NT&LF) http://www.ntlf.com/
The Stanford Center for Innovations in Learning (SCIL) 
http://scil.stanford.edu/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Anyone can SUBSCRIBE to Tomorrows-Professor Listserv by 
addressing an e-mail message to:
<Majordomo at lists.stanford.edu>

Do NOT put anything in the SUBJECT line but in the body of the
message type:

			subscribe tomorrows-professor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE to the Tomorrows-Professor send the following e-mail
message
to: <Majordomo at lists.stanford.edu>

unsubscribe tomorrows-professor
----------------------------------------------------------------------