Given the present state of the economy, and more specifically the job market, every so often there are stories in the press about the worth of a college education (for example: here, here and here). That debate usually comes down to one side pointing to the income differences between households with college graduates versus non-college grads, and the other side asking whether it makes economic sense to spend $100,000 on a B.A. in History, especially if you're ultimately going to end up in a field not related to the History degree?
Another issue related to this is in the news today: Grade Inflation.
Basically, there has been a long-standing accusation in some quarters that because of different pressures (i.e. parents, student expectations, class pass-fail statistics, effect on teacher evaluation, etc.) professors at four-year universities are handing out "As" & "Bs" like they're candy, devaluing the worth of the grades, student GPA as an assessment tool and the resulting degrees. A new study, which looked at grading at 200 four-year colleges & universities over the past 70 years, found that "A’s represent 43% of all letter grades, an increase of 28 percentage points since 1960 and 12 percentage points since 1988."
So "is our children learning" that much better than the Baby Boomers, or are people getting "A's" they don't deserve?
It used to be a 3.5 GPA (& something close to that for the science GPA) plus 30 on the MCAT was thought to be the hurdle for matriculation (or admittance) to a good medical school. If I had to guess, it's probably more like a 3.6 GPA and 31-33 on the MCAT nowadays.
From the New York Times:
The researchers collected historical data on letter grades awarded by more than 200 four-year colleges and universities. Their analysis (published in the Teachers College Record) confirm that the share of A grades awarded has skyrocketed over the years... private colleges and universities are by far the biggest offenders on grade inflation, even when you compare private schools to equally selective public schools.
|
What accounts for the higher G.P.A.’s over the last few decades?
The authors don’t attribute steep grade inflation to higher-quality or harder-working students. In fact, one recent study found that students spend significantly less time studying today than they did in the past.
Rather, the researchers argue that grade inflation began picking in the 1960s and 1970s probably because professors were reluctant to give students D’s and F’s. After all, poor grades could land young men in Vietnam.
They then attribute the rapid rise in grade inflation in the last couple of decades to a more “consumer-based approach” to education, which they say “has created both external and internal incentives for the faculty to grade more generously.” More generous grading can produce better instructor reviews, for example, and can help students be more competitive candidates for graduate schools and the job market.
It was my experience the professors in science classes were the ones least willing to curve grades on tests. Usually, the best you might get is the professor adding some extra-credit where you had to
work for the extra points. However, there were some professors that basically did everything they could to pass the entire class.
With sites like RateMyProfessors.com, students can use it to find the professors more conducive to curving a grade. And full disclosure, I used it. You would be a fool not to. I remember a biology class where any grade above 60 was considered a "B" and anything above 80 was an "A." It wasn't that the professor was a bad teacher or didn't thoroughly go through the material for those that wanted to learn it. He just curved the grades in the class like a mofo.
I had a gen-ed, 8am history class that didn't require attendance & consisted of 3 tests & a final. I showed up the first day to pick up the syllabus with the schedule, the review days before each test, the days of the tests, and passed the class with an "A." Looking back on it, even though everything worked out, it was a stupid thing to do for some extra sleep in the morning. If I had screwed up, I would have had no one to blame but myself for not putting the effort into going to class.
However, should effort, in & of itself, be taken into account when grading someone's performance? Two years ago, a study found that a significant number of students expect a grade of "B" or higher just for showing up to lectures & doing the required work, even if they don't do the required work particularly well.
|
A recent study by researchers at the University of California, Irvine, found that a third of students surveyed said that they expected B’s just for attending lectures, and 40 percent said they deserved a B for completing the required reading... James Hogge, associate dean of the Peabody School of Education at Vanderbilt University, said: “Students often confuse the level of effort with the quality of work. There is a mentality in students that ‘if I work hard, I deserve a high grade.’ “ In line with Dean Hogge’s observation are Professor Greenberger’s test results. Nearly two-thirds of the students surveyed said that if they explained to a professor that they were trying hard, that should be taken into account in their grade.
Jason Greenwood, a senior kinesiology major at the University of Maryland echoed that view. “I think putting in a lot of effort should merit a high grade,” Mr. Greenwood said. “What else is there really than the effort that you put in?... If you put in all the effort you have and get a C, what is the point?” he added. “If someone goes to every class and reads every chapter in the book and does everything the teacher asks of them and more, then they should be getting an A like their effort deserves. If your maximum effort can only be average in a teacher’s mind, then something is wrong.”
Sarah Kinn, a junior English major at the University of Vermont, agreed, saying, “I feel that if I do all of the readings and attend class regularly that I should be able to achieve a grade of at least a B.”
However, if there is grade inflation, the inverse of
grade deflation has consequences as well. Back in 2004, Princeton began a policy to limit "A's" to an average of 35% across departments.
Students say they now eye competitive classmates warily and shy away from classes perceived as difficult.
"It used to be that you'd let someone copy your notes if they were sick," says Mickel, 21, of Monroe, La. "Now, if someone misses classes, you'd probably still let them, but you're also thinking: 'Gee, you might get the A while I don't.'"
There is no quota in individual courses, despite what students think, says Dean of the College Nancy Malkiel. Still, the policy has made an A slightly more elusive. In the first two years, A's, (A-plus, A, A-minus), accounted for 41% of undergrad grades, down from 47% the two previous years.
From the
New York Times:
“The nightmare scenario, if you will, is that you apply with a 3.5 from Princeton and someone just as smart as you applies with a 3.8 from Yale,” said Daniel E. Rauch, a senior from Millburn, N.J.
The percentage of Princeton grades in the A range dipped below 40 percent [in 2009], down from nearly 50 percent when the policy was adopted in 2004. The class of 2009 had a mean grade-point average of 3.39, compared with 3.46 for the class of 2003. In a survey last year by the undergraduate student government, 32 percent of students cited the grading policy as the top source of unhappiness (compared with 25 percent for lack of sleep).