American universities have not adopted a universal grading system. Although discrepancies between universities lead to blurred standards in terms of real-world competencies, it makes sense that universities have developed their own grading criteria.
It is hard to represent the accomplishments of students with a number or letter given that performance is often relative to their own prior knowledge, instructors’ competencies and a program’s affordability. However, some systems work better than others. In particular, the higher education system in the U.S. could learn from its foreign counterparts in order to more successfully reward students for excellence.
Unfortunately, however, grade rationing — a system used by many of the top universities in the U.S. — is becoming more popular as a result of what professors and university officials call “grade inflation.”
Much like the term used in economics, this kind of inflation occurs when high grades become so common, they hold little value. In other words, if every student in a graduating class has an extremely high GPA, those averages, while excellent, mean less to potential employers and graduate programs than averages that stand out among the masses. Grade rationing attempts to solve this problem by limiting the number of specific marks one class may collectively receive.
However, like most potential solutions, grade rationing presents its own set of problematic implications. For instance, ranking students against each other only illustrates students’ performances relative to the programs in which they study. This grading system does not account for students at competing universities and therefore, does not represent a standard for graduates of specific degree programs.
This is especially problematic for students attending competitive, prestigious universities in which most students excel; excellence may not be rewarded simply because there are not enough A’s to go around. Additionally, this system discourages students from attending these universities — they worry that unnecessary competition might ultimately inhibit learning.
Attempting to combat the competitive nature of grade rationing, 10 American universities — including Reed and Harvey Mudd — have eliminated grading systems altogether. They claim this encourages students to thrive without excessive pressure to perform; and sure, that sounds great — but a system in which no grades exist presents implications similar to those of a grade rationing system.
Ultimately, employers and graduate programs cannot weigh the success of these students fairly against the success of students who attended traditional universities. And of course, the potential students have to slack off and apply minimal effort with little consequence is a topic of concern, too.
The U.K. and several schools in China have adopted a system in which students can receive one of three grades. There, grades are separated into categories like Excellent, Passing with Distinction and Passing; most students fall in the second category.
Because most students will receive the same grade, this system eliminates concerns regarding minor deficiencies and petty mistakes some instructors like to pick on. Additionally, employers recognize that a middle-mark does not imply inability because most people will receive one, allowing more potential success for students. This tiered system does not allow for grade inflation, because it expects that most students will end up in the middle somewhere.
Perhaps it would be good for some American students to be elevated by the notion that they have the same potential as most of their peers. And perhaps for some, realizing they must truly strive for a high mark might encourage true improvement and success.
Reach the columnist at kpolickk@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @kaelynpk
Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
