CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …
Tiêu đề
Where a is ordinary: The evolution of american college and university grading, 1940-2009
Tác giả
Rojstaczer S.; Healy C.
Năm xuất bản
2012
Source title
Teachers College Record
Số trích dẫn
109
DOI
Liên kết
Tóm tắt
Background/Context: College grades can influence a student's graduation prospects, academic motivation, postgraduate job choice, professional and graduate school selection, and access to loans and scholarships. Despite the importance of grades, national trends in grading practices have not been examined in over a decade, and there has been a limited effort to examine the historical evolution of college grading. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: Here we look at the evolution of grading over time and space at American colleges and universities over the last 70 years. Our data provide a means to examine how instructors' assessments of excellence, mediocrity, and failure have changed in higher education. Data Collection and Analysis: We have collected historical and contemporary data on A-F letter grades awarded from over 200 four-year colleges and universities. Our contemporary data on grades come from 135 schools, with a total enrollment of 1.5 million students. Research Design: Through the use of averages over time and space as well as regression models, we examine how grading has changed temporally and how grading is a function of school selectivity, school type, and geographic region. Findings/Results: Contemporary data indicate that, on average across a wide range of schools, A's represent 43% of all letter grades, an increase of 28 percentage points since 1960 and 12 percentage points since 1988. D's and F's total typically less than 10% of all letter grades. Private colleges and universities give, on average, significantly more A's and B's combined than public institutions with equal student selectivity. Southern schools grade more harshly than those in other regions, and science and engineering-focused schools grade more stringently than those emphasizing the liberal arts. At schools with modest selectivity, grading is as generous as it was in the mid-1980s at highly selective schools. These prestigious schools have, in turn, continued to ramp up their grades. It is likely that at many selective and highly selective schools, undergraduate GPAs are now so saturated at the high end that they have little use as a motivator of students and as an evaluation tool for graduate and professional schools and employers. Conclusions/Recommendations: As a result of instructors gradually lowering their standards, A has become the most common grade on American college campuses. Without regulation, or at least strong grading guidelines, grades at American institutions of higher learning likely will continue to have less and less meaning. © by Teachers College, Columbia University.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Adelman C., Principal indicators of student academic histories in postsecondary education, 1972-2000, (2004); Archer A.F., Hutchings A.D., Johnson B., A case for stricter grading, UMAP Journal, 19, pp. 299-313, (1998); Astin A.W., Predicting academic performance in college: Selectivity data for 2300 American colleges, (1971); Aud S., Hussar W., Kena G., Bianco K., Frohlich L., Kemp J., Et al., Table A-8-2: Actual and projected undergraduate enrollment in degree-granting 4- and 2-year postsecondary institutions, by sex, attendance status, and control of institution: Selected years, fall 1970-2020, The condition of education 2011: Indicator 8, undergraduate enrollment, (2011); Babcock P.S., Real costs of nominal grade inflation? New evidence from student course evaluations, Economic Inquiry, 48, pp. 983-996, (2010); Babcock P.S., Marks M., The falling time cost of college: Evidence from half a century of time use data, (2010); Bar T.R., Kadiyali V., Zussman A., Quest for knowledge and pursuit of grades: Information, course selection, and grade inflation at an Ivy League school, (2008); Battersby J.L., Typical folly: Evaluating student performance in higher education, (1973); Bayer A.A., What is wrong with "customer, College Teaching, 44, (1996); Chace W.M., The decline of the English department, American Scholar, 78, pp. 32-42, (2009); SAT data and reports, Table 2, mean SAT scores of college-bound seniors, 1967-2007, (2007); DeMarzo P.M., Fishman M.J., Hagerty K.M., Self-regulation and government oversight, Review of Economic Studies, 72, pp. 687-706, (2005); Dorans N., The recentering of SAT® scales and its effects on score distributions and score interpretations, (2002); Edson F.G., Grade distribution in 80 Mid-western liberal arts colleges, School and Society, 73, pp. 312-315, (1951); Ehrenberg R.G., Tuition rising: Why college costs so much, (2002); Ellis L., Burke D.M., Lomire P., McCormack D.R., Student grades and average ratings of instructional quality: The need for adjustment, Journal of Educational Research, 97, pp. 35-40, (2003); Regular meeting, Education Policy Committee, Annex 1, April 20, (1972); Feldman K.A., Grades and college students' evaluations of their courses and teachers, Research in Higher Education, 4, pp. 69-111, (1976); Finkelmeyer T., Critics say grade inflation at UW-Madison lowers bar for students-and professors, (2010); Frey B.S., Giving and receiving awards, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, pp. 377-388, (2006); Georgia's HOPE scholarship program overview, (2011); Johnson V.E., Grade inflation: A crisis in college education, (2003); Juola A.E., Grade inflation in higher education: What can or should we do, (1976); Juola A.E., Grade inflation in higher education-1979, (1980); Course selection in the rate-my-professors era, (2010); Kezim B., Pariseau S.E., Quinn F., Is grade inflation related to faculty status, Journal of Education for Business, 80, pp. 358-363, (2005); King J.E., Gender equity in higher education: Are male students at a disadvantage, (2000); King J.E., Gender equity in higher education: 2010, (2010); Kuh G.D., Kinzie J., Schuh J.H., Whitt E.J., Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter, (2005); Kuh G.D., Hu S., Unraveling the complexity of the increase in college grades from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, pp. 297-320, (1999); Kutner M., Greenberg E., Baer J., A first look at the literacy of America's Adults in the 21st century, (2006); Levine A., Cureton J.S., When hope and fear collide: A portrait of today's college student, (1998); Mansfield H.C., Grade inflation: It's time to face the facts, Chronicle of Higher Education, (2001); Marsh H.W., Roche L.A., Making students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility, American Psychologist, 52, pp. 1187-1197, (1997); McCabe J., Powell B., In my class? No." Professors' accounts of grade inflation, The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education, pp. 193-220, (2004); McSpirit S.J., Jones K.E., Grade inflation rates among different ability students, controlling for other factors, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 7, (1999); McSpirit S.J., Kopacz P., Jones K.E., Chapman A.D., Faculty opinion on grade inflation: Contradictions about its cause, College and University, 75, pp. 19-25, (2000); Meyer M., The grading of students, Science, 28, pp. 243-250, (1908); Youth indicators 2005: Trends in the wellbeing, (2005); Digest of education statistics, list of tables and figures 2005, (2005); Table 216. Total fall enrollment in degreegranting institutions, by level of enrollment and state or jurisdiction: 2004, 2005, and 2006, (2008); Table 204. Enrollment rates of 18- to 24-yearolds in degree-granting institutions, by type of institution and sex and race/ethnicity of student: 1967 through 2007, (2008); 2006 SAT data for all institutions downloaded from the IPEDS data center, (2009); Table 329, Number of applications, admissions, and enrollees; Their distribution across institutions accepting various percentages of applications; and SAT and ACT scores of applicants, by type and control of institution: 2008-09, (2009); Table 198, Total first-time freshmen fall enrollment in degree-granting institutions, by attendance status, sex of student, and type and control of institution: 1955 through 2008, (2009); Perrin N., How students at Dartmouth came to deserve better grades, Chronicle of Higher Education, (1998); Perry W.M., Are grades and grading systems comparable from institution to institution?, Registrar's Journal, 18, pp. 159-165, (1943); Rojstaczer S., Healy C., Grading in American colleges and universities, Teachers College Record, (2010); Ryan J.J., Anderson J.A., Birchler A.B., Student evaluations: The faculty responds, Research in Higher Education, 12, pp. 317-333, (1980); Saenz V.B., Barrera D.S., Findings from the 2005 College Student Survey (CSS): National Aggregates, (2007); Seldin P., Changing practices in faculty evaluation, (1984); Seldin P., The use and abuse of student ratings of professors, Chronicle of Higher Education, (1993); Spiegel M.R., Stephens L.J., Schaum's outline of statistics, (1998); Stassen M., Non-returning first-year students: Why they leave and where they go, UMass Assessment Bulletin, 4, 2, pp. 1-4, (2001); Suslow S., A report on an interinstitutional survey of undergraduate scholastic grading 1960s to 1970s, (1976); Vars F.E., Bowen W.G., Scholastic Aptitude Test scores, race, and academic performance in selective colleges and universities, The Black-White test score gap, pp. 457-479, (1998); Weinberg S.L., Grade inflation: An examination at the institutional level, Real data analysis, pp. 315-323, (2007); Weinberg B.A., Fleisher B.M., Hashimoto M., Evaluating methods for evaluating instruction: The case of higher education, (2007); Woodruff D.J., Ziomek R.L., High school grade inflation from 1991 To 2003, (2004); Zirkel P.A., Students as consumers, Phi Delta Kappan, 76, pp. 168-171, (1994)
Nơi xuất bản
Teachers College, Columbia University
Hình thức xuất bản
Article
Open Access
Nguồn
Scopus