5 ms·

As a professor, I'll put out there how I'm currently thinking about grade inflation in my case. Classes of let's say "Type 1" have lots of students and very sp

by bo1024 4y ago

As a professor, I'll put out there how I'm currently thinking about grade inflation in my case. Classes of let's say "Type 1" have lots of students and very specific learning objectives. I need to make sure everyone who passes the class is proficient in those objectives. So I focus on teaching the baseline expectations. I give assessments where, if you understand the material, you get it right. Therefore, most students who have the prereqs and try hard get A's. The median grade is pretty high along with a tail of people who mostly aren't trying that hard. But you don't need special aptitude to get an A. Unfortunately that can make the class pretty easy for top students, and I'm working on ways to challenge them. But I don't need to knock the whole class down to a B just to challenge top students. The other "type 2" classes are upper level where people are there to learn hard material and are self motivated. Here students may face tougher challenges and experience more failure even when they put in lots of time and effort. But I usually give As pretty easily. The fact that they're trying hard in a difficult upper level class already shows they're ahead of 95% of their classmates, why would I punish their GPA for that? And most of these students don't need the threat of a bad grade to motivate them, they put in the effort because they're interested. Of course some students will get bad grades in the class but the median is again usually pretty high. So I find myself a contributor to grade inflation. Employers, look less at GPA and more at what courses a person challenged themselves with!

jseliger 4y ago
I have taught at non-elite schools and have observed that, particularly in classes without objective tests, there is a strong incentive for the professors to grade up: https://jakeseliger.com/2015/01/13/what-incentivizes-professors-to-grade-honestly-nothing/ https://jakeseliger.com/2015/01/13/what-incentivizes-profess... Unhappiness about grades can also be transmuted into complaints and eventually investigations about other matters—a thing I've seen happen. There is something to the "They pretend to learn, and we pretend to teach" line, in many situations. (That I am observing this situation doesn't mean I approve of it.)
- bo1024 4y ago
  Thanks for the link. There's a great point in there about how adjuncts are under much more pressure here than tenure-track.
codethief 4y ago
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us! > Unfortunately that can make the class pretty easy for top students, and I'm working on ways to challenge them. But I don't need to knock the whole class down to a B just to challenge top students. Why not? What's wrong with a B? You said it yourself, most people in your class are average, although there are a few top people. Why would you assign them the same grade when the whole point of grading is to assess how well a student is doing? (Why grade anything at all then?) And why rob the average students of the honest but very useful feedback that "You're doing fine but there are still ways for you to improve"? For instance, back when I was TA'ing a lab course for some introductory physics class, I remember a student coming over to ask me why I hadn't given her full points on her lab report. She said now she might no longer be getting an A for the overall class. …which, from my POV, would have been entirely justified: She had had no clue what she was doing and had not understood the experiments at all (no surprise given that she hardly paid attention in class), and her lab reports very clearly reflected that. How could I ever give her full points? How would I have justified that in front of those of her peers who were doing better than her because they were working much harder (or were at least paying attention in class)? Obviously, that student had come to live under the impression that A's were the norm and that her performance, no matter how bad, demanded an A. But even if one disregards the argument that grades (should) provide a measuring stick and feedback mechanism for average students as to where they stand, one should still ask the question, Why rob the top students of their reward (an outstanding grade) when they truly excel? Very good performance typically comes with very high costs for the students (lots of time is spent on studying), and rewards or at least recognition of what they've achieved are therefore absolutely necessary, I'd say. So have you considered that, by makng A's your default grade, you might be demotivating some of your top students? > And most of these students don't need the threat of a bad grade to motivate them Again, since when has a B been a bad grade? It's obviously a rhetorical question: B's have gained the connotation of being bad grades ever since everyone and their dog have been getting A's without having to put in much effort. Grade inflation leads to further grade inflation. I'm afraid, though, your reasoning just confirms (and reinforces) this usual catch 22 but it doesn't really justify it.
- bo1024 4y ago
  Thanks for the reply! Maybe I should clarify that students in my classes only get As if they fully earn it on the assessments. Bad performance doesn't get As, grade grubbing doesn't work, etc. However, I find myself capping the difficulty level of assessments in type 1 classes, which makes As very accessible to almost anyone who puts in the work. The philosophy is, here's what I expect you to know, if you demonstrate that you know all of it, you can get an A. (Of course, the student in your story shouldn't get an A or maybe even a C if they don't know the material!) I think a philosophical difference might be that I'm thinking about type 1 classes like a set of weights students have to learn to lift. If you can lift all the weights, you've accomplished the goals of the class and I have no problem giving you an A. If you struggle here or there but can mostly lift them, you can get a B or C. I'll still be okay passing you up to a class that needs you to lift objects to accomplish more complex tasks. I'm getting the sense that your approach is more like a race, where people who finish way ahead of others should be rewarded with higher grades. Just a different approach. Yeah, I worry about demotivating top students. If I get any extra time for adjusting my class prep I'll spend it on extra challenges or resources for them. But that's also what type 2 classes are for.

by bo1024 4y ago

jseliger 4y ago

I have taught at non-elite schools and have observed that, particularly in classes without objective tests, there is a strong incentive for the professors to grade up: https://jakeseliger.com/2015/01/13/what-incentivizes-professors-to-grade-honestly-nothing/ https://jakeseliger.com/2015/01/13/what-incentivizes-profess... Unhappiness about grades can also be transmuted into complaints and eventually investigations about other matters—a thing I've seen happen. There is something to the "They pretend to learn, and we pretend to teach" line, in many situations. (That I am observing this situation doesn't mean I approve of it.)

bo1024 4y ago
Thanks for the link. There's a great point in there about how adjuncts are under much more pressure here than tenure-track.

codethief 4y ago

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us! > Unfortunately that can make the class pretty easy for top students, and I'm working on ways to challenge them. But I don't need to knock the whole class down to a B just to challenge top students. Why not? What's wrong with a B? You said it yourself, most people in your class are average, although there are a few top people. Why would you assign them the same grade when the whole point of grading is to assess how well a student is doing? (Why grade anything at all then?) And why rob the average students of the honest but very useful feedback that "You're doing fine but there are still ways for you to improve"? For instance, back when I was TA'ing a lab course for some introductory physics class, I remember a student coming over to ask me why I hadn't given her full points on her lab report. She said now she might no longer be getting an A for the overall class. …which, from my POV, would have been entirely justified: She had had no clue what she was doing and had not understood the experiments at all (no surprise given that she hardly paid attention in class), and her lab reports very clearly reflected that. How could I ever give her full points? How would I have justified that in front of those of her peers who were doing better than her because they were working much harder (or were at least paying attention in class)? Obviously, that student had come to live under the impression that A's were the norm and that her performance, no matter how bad, demanded an A. But even if one disregards the argument that grades (should) provide a measuring stick and feedback mechanism for average students as to where they stand, one should still ask the question, Why rob the top students of their reward (an outstanding grade) when they truly excel? Very good performance typically comes with very high costs for the students (lots of time is spent on studying), and rewards or at least recognition of what they've achieved are therefore absolutely necessary, I'd say. So have you considered that, by makng A's your default grade, you might be demotivating some of your top students? > And most of these students don't need the threat of a bad grade to motivate them Again, since when has a B been a bad grade? It's obviously a rhetorical question: B's have gained the connotation of being bad grades ever since everyone and their dog have been getting A's without having to put in much effort. Grade inflation leads to further grade inflation. I'm afraid, though, your reasoning just confirms (and reinforces) this usual catch 22 but it doesn't really justify it.

bo1024 4y ago
Thanks for the reply! Maybe I should clarify that students in my classes only get As if they fully earn it on the assessments. Bad performance doesn't get As, grade grubbing doesn't work, etc. However, I find myself capping the difficulty level of assessments in type 1 classes, which makes As very accessible to almost anyone who puts in the work. The philosophy is, here's what I expect you to know, if you demonstrate that you know all of it, you can get an A. (Of course, the student in your story shouldn't get an A or maybe even a C if they don't know the material!) I think a philosophical difference might be that I'm thinking about type 1 classes like a set of weights students have to learn to lift. If you can lift all the weights, you've accomplished the goals of the class and I have no problem giving you an A. If you struggle here or there but can mostly lift them, you can get a B or C. I'll still be okay passing you up to a class that needs you to lift objects to accomplish more complex tasks. I'm getting the sense that your approach is more like a race, where people who finish way ahead of others should be rewarded with higher grades. Just a different approach. Yeah, I worry about demotivating top students. If I get any extra time for adjusting my class prep I'll spend it on extra challenges or resources for them. But that's also what type 2 classes are for.