Grade Inflation, Higher and Higher

[JumpyTheFrog]

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/29/survey-finds-grade-inflation-continues-rise-four-year-colleges-not-community-college

 

Interesting charts about the changes in the distribution of college grades over the years. In the comments some people discussed that part of the reason might be a large increase in the number of students withdrawing from courses.

[JanetC]

Two other reasons I can think of:

 

The stratification of education. Basically, everyone at Harvard is a high-achieving genius, for example. If a college has a more homogeneous student body, then it's more likely the grades will be more homogeneous as well. Since community colleges have the most diversity, it explains why they have less grade inflation. I wonder if the trend still holds at a "directional" state U, too?

 

The growing number of courses taught by adjuncts. If you are barely being paid minimum wage to teach a class, you probably don't care as much about challenging assignments, careful grading, etc. There's also the pressure to keep the students happy to get good reviews so you get another assignment.

 

[Pegasus]

The biggest difference that I've noticed from my own college days is the prevalence of extra credit. I think my professors would have laughed in the face of a student asking to earn extra credit.  Now it seems to be not unusual to offer multiple extra credit opportunities per semester course. So, very underperforming students still get the Ds and Fs but the typical B or C student who works hard can make use of extra credit to bump the final grade to A. 

[Bootsie]

 Since community colleges have the most diversity, it explains why they have less grade inflation.

The main difference in grade distributions between the community colleges and the other colleges is the number of people at the community college level receiving an "F."  C's and D's have declined and A's have risen at CC's just like at other institutions. 

 

One of the things these numbers don't show is what has to be done to make an "A" or to make a "D" or "F" for that matter.  With multiple choice exams, curving, extra credit, etc. it is harder to make an "F" if you just show up for a class.  In my experience, most students who make an "F" do not even attempt a large portion of the coursework.  Rarely do I see a student who has shown up for all exams and turned in all assignments who makes a D or F.  An F seldom signals failing to perform at a satisfactory level; it simply signals failure to show up. 

 

A certain percentage of students sign up for classes and then never show up.  This tends to happen more often at CCs. 

 

Reliance on student evaluations for faculty promotion and pay raises has also contributed to his.  I had a colleague last year whose student completed ONE task of the semester--completing online faculty evaluations.  The student had not attended a single class, done any homework, or taken any exams.  He received his extra credit for doing evaluations--thinking that might be enough to push him from a 0 average to a passing grade!

[regentrude]

Two other reasons I can think of:

 

The stratification of education. Basically, everyone at Harvard is a high-achieving genius, for example. If a college has a more homogeneous student body, then it's more likely the grades will be more homogeneous as well. Since community colleges have the most diversity, it explains why they have less grade inflation. I wonder if the trend still holds at a "directional" state U, too?

 

I disagree with the bolded - because not every highly selective institution has the same grade inflation as Harvard. It is well know that the difficulty with Harvard is getting in, not getting through. Even in a top tier selective university that only admits extremely smart students, you can have challenging coursework that differentiates between students: even very smart students are not all equally gifted in all areas nor equally hard working. There are definite differences between students' natural abilities even at such places, as well as between students' willingness to put in time and effort.

My DD attends such a university.

[regentrude]

I see the main reason for grade inflation at many schools in the push for retention and recruitment.

 

I teach at a public university. It is very difficult to uphold standards when increasing numbers of students are admitted. At my institution, student numbers have increased by a factor 1.5 since I started teaching, with virtually no increase in the number of instructors.

Many instructors fight hard not to inflate grades and uphold standards. An increased work load may mean, however, easier to grade assignments that lack the complexity of assignments that were feasible with smaller student numbers. Grades may look the same, but the level of work required may not be the same.

 

Lastly, I have often said that it is completely meaningless to list grades or grading scales without the assignments. What does a particular grade mean?

An "A" in my calculus based engineering physics course at a public U means something completely different from an "A" in my DD's first quarter Honors physics class (our grad students are incapable of solving her homework assignments).

Looking at the grades or GPAs means absolutely nothing if you don't actually scrutinize the assignments and the way the grades are constructed.

Edited April 5, 2016 by regentrude

[regentrude]

And I have a comment about the comments to the article that claims that math and science grades are based on objective criteria. Sure, the evaluation is objective - the answer is either correct or it is not. But it gets already tricky when it comes to partial credit for long worked out problems.

But where it is really an illusion to believe in objective grades is the structure of the course and the level of assignments: what percentage is homework and what percentage tests? How are the tests designed: do they replicate problems the students have seen previously in examples and homework, or do they require the students to apply their knowledge to situations they have not seen? Have the students "trained" to jump through a particular hoop?

I can construct you two extremely similar physics exams that would get very different results from the same group of students in the same course, depending on how similar the test is to homework problems and how closely they have been "taught to the test". (and yes, there will still be students who would fail if I made the exam identical to the previous day's  test preparation homework...)

[JanetC]

The main difference in grade distributions between the community colleges and the other colleges is the number of people at the community college level receiving an "F."  C's and D's have declined and A's have risen at CC's just like at other institutions. 

 

The article states that the trend towards more A's has peaked at CC's and the percentage of A's has actually gone down slightly.

The article states that the trend towards more A's has peaked at CC's and the percentage of A's has actually gone down slightly.

 

Also, CC's and other four year schools have a higher proportion of untenured lecturers than they used to, whose continued employment may depend on student evaluations, and everyone knows that the easiest way to get good student evaluations is to give high grades.

Edited April 5, 2016 by GGardner

[JanetC]

I wonder, too, about the underlying idea that "lots of students getting C's equals a better education." 

 

Do students need to be constantly ranked in order to ensure that they are motivated to learn?

 

We're currently rethinking the cutthroat nature of competitive college prep and admissions - can we say that "enough is enough" and let the poor teens have a break from the stress? Or, is it important to keep the stress and punishing workload up when they get to college?

[Bootsie]

The article states that the trend towards more A's has peaked at CC's and the percentage of A's has actually gone down slightly.

In the 1960's less than 15% of CC grades were A's--now that number is over 35%.  So even though the number may have fallen from 37% to 35% in recent years, the trend has been for an increase in % of A's.

[Bootsie]

I wonder, too, about the underlying idea that "lots of students getting C's equals a better education." 

 

Do students need to be constantly ranked in order to ensure that they are motivated to learn?

 

We're currently rethinking the cutthroat nature of competitive college prep and admissions - can we say that "enough is enough" and let the poor teens have a break from the stress? Or, is it important to keep the stress and punishing workload up when they get to college?

Having a lot of students getting C's does not necessarily equal a better education.  It can point to better distinguishing between students who have a particular talent and passion for a subject from those who do not.  It would provide additional information to employers. 

 

Having a "C" be average and acceptable could do a lot to lower stress.  Much of the stress that I have seen has come from every student thinking they need to have more than a 100 average in every class they take because anything less is a failure. 

[regentrude]

I wonder, too, about the underlying idea that "lots of students getting C's equals a better education." 

 

Do students need to be constantly ranked in order to ensure that they are motivated to learn?

 

We're currently rethinking the cutthroat nature of competitive college prep and admissions - can we say that "enough is enough" and let the poor teens have a break from the stress? Or, is it important to keep the stress and punishing workload up when they get to college?

 

It is not about ranking and cutthroat.

A class in which everybody gets an A shortchanges the strong students who would have been capable of learning more, but were offered only a level so low that mediocre students could receive top grades.

So yes, a class in which the average is a C challenges the average student while at the same time offering at least something of a challenge to a strong student. If the class were dumbed down so that the average student received an A, many people in the class would have learned less.

 

I withdrew my kids from ps because the work was too easy, they received no appropriate instruction, and it was doing them a disservice not to be stretched.

I see the same problem with college classes that are geared towards the lowest common denominator: strong students receive no appropriate instruction and are not given an opportunity to stretch themselves and grow. This is a waste of potential, and I am acutely aware that this, sadly, is the reality for the best students who are taking my classes.

Edited April 5, 2016 by regentrude

[mathwonk]

this reminds me of an article in the harvard alumni mag a few years back.  they noted that in the 1960's the average undergrad grade at harvard had been maybe a C+, whereas at the time of the article it was maybe an A-.  The opinion of current students was that they were just smarter now than we were in the 60's, but average SAT scores had gone down over the same period.

 

It also depends on which department you survey.  In recent times at UGA Athens, I believe the average gpa in the math dept was some kind of C, maybe C-, but in several education departments it was an A or A-, at least for majors.

 

I have learned today as well that there is a current grade scandal at UNC, which just played in the national title basketball game, concerning an 18 year period in which students, including a much greater proportion of athletes than others, received high grades for classes that did not even meet.  So protecting the money associated with athletics is also a motive.  Nothing happened yet to Roy Williams at UNC, and the NCAA charges were mainly directed at minor figures, but at UGA a similar scandal involving head coach Jim Herrick some years back resulted in his firing.  Sadly, it also resulted in decimating the prowess of the basketball program which is now apparently run honestly but cannot any longer compete with professional programs like that at UNC. 

 

Indeed there was a plagiarism scandal recently even at Harvard involving a large number of athletes including the stars of the mens basketball team.  The coach, Tommy Amaker, of the Harvard team has had great success recently for the first tme in Harvard history.  Nothing happened to Mr Amaker, and the guilty basketball team stars were allowed to leave school for one year and re - enroll and go back to winning for the basketball team.  This seems to contrast with my memory from the 1960's that plagiarism was then an offense resulting in expulsion.

Edited April 5, 2016 by mathwonk

[Bluegoat]

I think there are a lot of things that account for this.

 

There has been a general trend to see anything less than a perfect mark as a failure.  This is also true in other areas - letters of reccomendation for example, are expected in our culture to be really glowing.  This isn't true everywhere, and used to be less true here.  This seems to be a sort of general cultural change. 

 

The movement of the university to be run as a business.  Students are clients who pay, so they need to be satisfied.  This seems to have affected many things, course offerings being one.  Pressure from administration to keep numbers high can be really significant. There is a lot that could be said about this.

 

There are in many cases too many people educated to be academics for the jobs available, and fewer than ever tenured positions.  So, more pressure to keep students happy to keep a job, and less time to spend on really serving the goals of the university.

 

Less respect by students and parents of the university as a teaching institution and more who view it as a ticket to a job.  The idea too that some people might just not be cut out for, or interested, in the kind of thinking universities do, even if they are smart and capable, is seen as elitist.

 

An idea that having more students get degrees will improve the economy or mean a higher standard of living, resulting in pressure for universities to educate more people, and pressure in the workforce and by parents to send kids to university.

 

 

Somewhat related - a few of my friends who teach have commented to me that they are much more likely to have students complain about marks, including fairly high ones - like an A as opposed to an A+.  Or - even have parents complain.