by Telesphore

Created on: July 31, 2007

The grading system as it is provides an inaccurate depiction of a students ability to achieve (or not achieve) in various academic activities. Although the courses for program x in universities cover approximately the same material, since they are not administered by the same professor, perform evaluations in the same manner, or use the same resources to convey the material - It is unfair to say that because student one scored an A, and the other a B that the first student is more qualified.

This argument can be supported by proof by counterexample: Many universities are required to fit their students into a specific distribution to keep the course median at a specific grade letter; typically a C. If a professor encounters a situation where the majority of students score D or below, he/she concludes that the means of evaluation were too difficult and will adjust the marks accordingly so that the grades fits into the proper distribution. Suddenly, students who scored the highest of their peers see themselves with a final mark of B when in reality they could have scored a D on the exam.

Compare this to a student who in a previous year with the same professor was subjected to the exact same material, but a 'smarter' class where the students naturally fit into the distribution. He or she scored a C on the exam, and since no adjustments are made, keeps a final mark of C.

Based on these two scenarios, the student present in the first situation has the higher mark, but are they truly more knowledgeable of the material? It was well known that professors manipulate the marks they distribute (aka bell curving). This can be prevented by the introduction of a pass/fail course with strict requirements outlined at the beginning of the course.

Learn more about this author, Telesphore.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.