High Costs (Tests and Grades, Part 3)
Welcome to the final installment in my 3 part segment, ‘Tests and Grades.’ To begin, this series of posts was all inspired by this New York Times article, now days old.
First, Tony’s comment on Part 2:
I discussed that article with a professor last week. My view is that the student’s attitude is a natural offshoot of one of the fundamental pieces of the American psyche – the idea that if you work hard you can succeed, regardless of where you come from. Even the griping professors are loathe to come out and say “students can try as hard as they want, but unless they have enough natural aptitude, they are not going to get an A.”
As for the article itself, it was poorly researched. Do we really know that this is a trend merely by interviewing a few professors and quoting some students? Isn’t it a universal phenomena that as people get older they tend to perceive the younger generations as more irresponsible regardless of any shifts in behavior? Is there evidence that grade inflation isn’t being caused by an increase in the quality of the average student, brought on by easier access to information via technology? It felt like a case of ‘we all know that kids are whiny nowadays, so why bother actually researching something we already know’-style journalism.
Several excellent points upon which I will now elaborate.
1. If we increase grading standards to the point where most students cannot earn ‘A’s, does education quality increase? I would argue no. If we want to increase the amount that students learn at any level, we need inspired, motivated students who are excited about the subject matter. Reward is an essential component to motivation, and where the student sees no reward, learning suffers. If it’s impossible to earn an ‘A’ without exceptional natural aptitude, aren’t we teaching our students that working hard will not produce good results? Is this the attitude we want in the working world? Yes, effort does not guarantee results, but the correlation is strong enough that it matters.
To those complaining about low standards, which is more important – the average GPA or the students’ learning? If, when looking at hiring or admitting applicants, you could assess either knowledge or GPA, wouldn’t you pick knowledge every time, no matter how fair or unfair the assigned grades? Grade inflation matters not if the applicant is well-qualified. Until we see proof of real-world consequences (and I want dollar figures on loss), complaints about grade inflation seem easily deflated.
2. Increased knowledge availability means increased expectations and increased performance. As Tony points out, I have at my fingertips information that was available only with an exceptional amount of work 50 years ago. Today, I can read articles online that I would have needed to travel to a far off library to see just one generation ago. Studying scientific subjects has changed as well. We have made so many advances in the last 50 years that high schoolers are now routinely learning information that was once collegiate level.
In other words, classes are harder and information is easier. Based on this, can we really expect the standards of yesteryear to still apply? If we have a set standard, it is easier for students to meet it. When the internet can provide you with links to scientific journals, all students can read that material, not just those most dedicated to the subject matter. And with this comes more difficulty. In years past, students may have learned only from a textbook. Now, our interconnectedness means professors can share the latest research with students. We have greater expectations that may not translate well into grading schema. Less valued is knowledge itself and more valued is the ability to obtain knowledge when necessary. A star professor from 25 years ago may be a bumbling, out-of-touch nobody if he can’t use the internet today.
3. The article itself is nothing but a zeitgeist of our current academic climate. With more students than ever enrolled in college, there’s a wider range of talent and ability. We have much greater variability in areas of motivation, natural ability, and interest. It’s easy to say that “students these days” are world apart from times past, but requirements have never been more stringent. My father didn’t have to take science courses to get his bachelor’s degree. I was required to take at least 12 credits of hard science for an English major.
And the article is poorly researched. There are lots of students I meet everyday who work really hard during the semester and are happy when they come away with a ‘B.’ Maybe on the East Coast (where, news stories would have you believe, not getting into an Ivy League school is suicide-worthy) things are different. But here in the Midwest, we have reasonable expectations.
4. Finally, with education prices where they are, don’t students have a right to expect skilled instruction, fair grades, and an overall quality education? If I’m forking out tens of thousands of dollars just so I can get an entry level job somewhere, shouldn’t I have the right to know what to expect from assignments and exams, the grading criteria I need to meet to get the grade I want, and an instructor who can give me the material I need to succeed? If I was paying that much for a product, I would expect it to be relatively straight-forward to operate and come with an instruction manual. And that’s at the least.
For every student grousing about grades, maybe she just has her eye on the bottom line. If she works hard, does the assignment as written, attends class, does the readings, and studies well, and then she earns a ‘C’ – wouldn’t our hard-working, individualist society want her in the professor’s office demanding answers? If the government wants to fund all college educations, then maybe grading could be a little firmer. But until that happens, we’re still Americans, and we want our money’s worth.
Related posts (automatically generated):