A blog about economics instruction. "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."--Albert Einstein

Thursday, November 17, 2005

The War on Grade Inflation

Professor Harvey C. Mansfield: “We should stop giving our students the same grades they used to get in high school.”

Harvard Professor Harvey C. Mansfield is controversial. More than once he's stirred the pot on the issue of grade inflation. You might think of him as the General Patton on the War on Grade Inflation. This is one General who has a pretty good take on the enemy. Perhaps he revels in the nickname students have given him: Harvey C. Minus Mansfield.

As an instructor, I like the boldness with which Dr. Mansfield approaches the issue. It takes guts to award two grades to every student in his classes, one public grade and one private. The first is the student's official course grade, which is sent to the Harvard registrar. That grade is admittedly inflated to match the overall grade distribution at Harvard, which today amounts to one fourth A's and another fourth A-'s. The second grade is an unofficial accounting of each student's relative performance, with the effects of grade inflation removed.

In defense of the two-grade system, Dr. Mansfield writes:

The two-grade device is a way to show my contempt for the present system, yet not punish students who take my course. My intent was to get attention and to provoke some new thinking.

Dr. Mansfield puts his finger on the problem with grade inflation:

Grade inflation compresses all grades at the top, making it difficult to discriminate the best from the very good, the very good from the good, the good from the mediocre. Surely a teacher wants to mark the few best students with a grade that distinguishes them from all the rest in the top quarter, but at Harvard that's not possible.

What does this say about professors who are complicit in grade inflation?

Professors do not say to themselves, "This is what I can require; anything above that enters into excellence." No. With an eye to student course evaluations and confounded by the realization that they have somehow lost authority, professors begin from what they think students expect. American colleges used to set their own expectations. Now, increasingly, they react to student expectations ...

Thus another evil of grade inflation is the loss of faculty morale that it reveals. It signifies that professors care less about their teaching. Anyone who cares a lot about something -- for example, a baseball fan -- is very critical in making judgments about it. Far from the opposite of caring, being critical is the very consequence of caring. It is difficult for students to work hard, or for the professor to get them to work hard, when they know that their chances of getting an A or A- are 50-50. Students today are still motivated to get good grades, but if they do not wish to work hard toward that end, they can always maneuver and bargain.

How did Harvard, and by extension many other American universities, get into such a mess?

Grade inflation has resulted from the emphasis in American education on the notion of self-esteem. According to that therapeutic notion, the purpose of education is to make students feel capable and empowered. So to grade them, or to grade them strictly, is cruel and dehumanizing. Grading creates stress. It encourages competition rather than harmony. It is judgmental.

You might be thinking, "What's so controversial? Here's a professor who would like to implement higher standards. Nothing wrong with that, is there?" Dr. Mansfield isn't content to let sacred cows go unslaughtered. The academic sacred cows of silent acceptance of racial preferences and the damage done by multiculturalism are central to his arguments:

At colleges, self-esteem often goes hand in hand with multiculturalism or sensitivity to people of diverse races and ethnicities -- meaning that professors must avoid offending the identities (still another name for self-esteem) of victimized groups.

I know what that means. It means that despite all the talk about free speech at Harvard, you had better watch what you say. And how you grade.

When I was interviewed by The Boston Globe about my two-grade policy, one cause of grade inflation that I cited provoked a fiercely defensive reaction from the administrators at Harvard. I said that when grade inflation got started, in the late 60's and early 70's, white professors, imbibing the spirit of affirmative action, stopped giving low or average grades to black students and, to justify or conceal it, stopped giving those grades to white students as well.

Dr. Mansfield calls for university leaders to put standards first. He's seeking a political solution to the problem of grade inflation, focused on the politics of university governance. As an economist, I'm in a position to remind Dr. Mansfield that there's another force, more powerful than university politics, that has the potential to contribute toward a solution to the problem. That force is the free market.

Here's my argument in a nutshell. Grade inflation makes it more difficult and costly for employers to sort students by abilities. For example, there are real, significant costs associated with hiring a young engineer of average ability when the job calls for an engineer of exceptional ability. Thus, employers have a preference for hiring graduates of universities where grades correlate closely with the underlying abilities of the students.

Universities that allow rampant grade inflation will, in the long run, see recruiting of their graduates suffer. Additionally, when the best students come to understand that grade inflation diminishes their chances for a job, the students themselves, in partnership with employers, will call for greater realism in grading.


Perhaps Dr. Mansfield should see that employers know about the grade inflation he so passionately writes about by putting copies of his writings about Harvard's grade inflation into the hands of companies that recruit Harvard graduates.

Now, here's the diabolical part of my suggestion. Without student's names attached in order to preserve their privacy, Dr. Mansfield should put those unofficial grades into the hands of recruiters, too, right next to the official grades. I wonder how a company would react when it realizes that the A student that it has been recruiting is really only a C student. Just maybe, he would have an instant ally in his war on grade inflation. Remember, all's fair in love and war!

Link

4 Comments:

Blogger Luke said...

I am actually a student at Harvard, and I would like to defend grade inflation. In fact, I believe GPA is pretty much meaningless in any case, since it doesn't measure ability or work ethic reliably (but that's beside the point). (which I say despite having an above-average GPA)

There are two good reasons for grade inflation: First, many students here are simply A students--they'll do whatever is expected. Second, there's a huge gap between the top, middle, and bottom of many classes, and you can't fail 1/3 of a class just because there are so many smarter people.

One thing that many people also forget is that D's are failing grades at Harvard (well, you still get credit for the course, but you can be put on academic probation), so the grading scale needs to be compressed from C- to A anyway.

In my experience, in many humanities-type classes or easier science classes, the expectations are clear and reasonable. And pretty much every student who is at Harvard for academic reasons will meet or exceed these expectations. That's why B+ is the average--really, there just are that many people here who do all the work 100%.

A problem with giving grades based on a curve is that difference in ability is huge among Harvard students. A math major might be interested in studying literature, but should they need to compete with all the Harvard literature majors who are the best in the nation at what they do?

What I find the strongest argument against grade inflation is the issue with difficult classes. How should a professor go about grading an extremely difficult course? Only the brightest students could even consider taking it, so shouldn't everyone who does the work get an A? And then what about easier versions of classes? Should everyone who has to take multivariable calculus get a C at most, because Harvard has 3 levels of honors calculus above that class?

To throw out an example, Mansfield's course Ec 10 is considered to have a fairly difficult curve by many students of economics. But if you put the typical math major in this course, they easily earn an A since the concepts are much easier than the abstract mathematics done here. Does this mean Prof. Mansfield shouldn't give A's to anyone but these math students? In fact, these students probably shouldn't even be taking this level of course at all!

Anyway, sorry for the rant, but hopefully there's some food for thought in there. I do feel pretty strongly about the issue, because I really dislike the fact that so many people will take easy classes to get the A, when what students really should be doing is taking the hardest classes they can and pushing themselves, regardless of its effect on GPA. After all, we're at school to learn.

11:10 PM

 
Blogger Ronald M. Ayers said...

Thanks for the comment, Luke. One possible flaw in your reasoning occurs where you defend high grades at Harvard by pointing out that the students do all the work 100 percent. The question I would raise is whether some do the work better than others. Should students be rewarded for doing work or for how well they do the work? In any case, it's good to hear from a Harvard student. And thank you for a long,well-reasoned comment. I'd give you an A for the comment, if I were giving grades :-)

11:18 PM

 
Blogger Anthrogrl said...

My former geology professor once told me that if you don't have to work hard in a class to earn an "A", that class shouldn't even be taught in a univesity setting. Looking back, I think what he meant was that college should challenge you; you should sweat blood to earn an "A" for a course.

However, I know each college and university has different ideas about grading. Personally, I believe a BA from UTSA is no more or less valuable than a BA from Harvard. It depends on the individual how much education s/he gets out of their education.

I find myself leaning towards Dr. Mansfield's argument. After all, if I'm not performing well in a class, I want to know so I can push myself that much harder.

5:11 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The problem here is that the concept of “Grade Inflation” is itself fundamentally dishonest.

What is a grade? It is supposed to be an assessment of a student’s grasp of “the material”—it is a performance assessment of both the teacher and the student. If the material to be mastered is clearly laid out AND the student masters it ACCORDING TO THE OBJECTIVES STATED BEFOREHAND, then the student deserves an “A.” If not, the student deserves some lesser “mark”—plain and simple. Integrity demands accurate and objective grading according to pre-determined standards. Furthermore, if everyone in the class masters the material than everyone should get an “A.” (The teacher in such a case deserves kudos too.) To do otherwise is to (indeed) make the game up as we go along.

The problem is that too many professors (and educational institutions) make up their teaching programs up as they go along. Then, having realized the unfairness of having foisted (what ultimately becomes) unplanned and unconsidered extra BUSYWORK on their students, they guiltily “give” them a grade “they did not disserve”—or place other obstacles (such as “teacher evaluations”) in the way of maintaining the integrity of the performance feedback process.

Such passive aggression is the product of the type of thinking that created the (“Grade Inflation”) situation in the first place. It is hard for some teachers (and educational institutions) to accept the fact that some people easily master the material that they struggled with. Realizing, usually after the class term has started, that their students have mastered what they had planned to teach (and are therefore bored), such teachers “up the bar.” The only problem with this upping of the bar is that it is not what the students signed up for. If they wanted an “open ended” game of educational “one-ups,” they would have signed up to go on an episode of “Jeopardy.”

All honest education is “teaching to the test,” as THE TEST IS THE OBJECTIVE MEASURE—assuming that it is properly constructed.

Creativity has always been a “private” matter. It is the job of the educator to make sure THE RULES are understood, of the student to understand them, and of the “graduate” to break them in his making of new ones. If a teacher needs the ego trip of expressing his “creativity,” he should seek it in his own accomplishments and not in the frustrations of the sycophantic students he creates.

Posted by Bill Churchill (January 13, 2005)

12:45 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home