NEWS
Report shows grading standards fluctuate
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Sundeep Malladi:
- In-Depth: What's affected by budget cuts? (September 1, 2005)
- In-Depth: Letter and the law (October 13, 2005)
Related Stories:
- Faculty endorses Campus Drive name change (October 7, 2008)
- Two employees to be let go from chancellor's office (November 13, 2008)
- UW hosts event that ponders grade inflation (October 13, 2003)
- U.S. colleges see grade increases (January 17, 2003)
Share This:
by Sundeep Malladi
Thursday, September 23, 2004
Students have known for a long time that some professors grade differently than others, said Bruce Beck, a Senior Policy and Planning Analyst.
In 1999, the University Academic Planning Council initiated a study through the University of Wisconsin’s Provost’s Office to find out how grade distribution varied from lecture to lecture within a specific class.
The council turned to Beck to plot graphs of grade distribution.
“The University Academic Planning Council was concerned about situations where the same course in the same semester is being taught to different classes by different instructors who have different grading practices,” Beck said. “And they thought it was somewhat unfair to have their grade determined simply by the luck of getting into one class or another.”
The UAPC again requested the report, “Review of Grading Patterns Within Undergraduate Courses” in 2004.
This report examined undergraduate courses from fall 2003-04. Statistics from the 2004 report show classes like “Educational Psychology 301: Human Abilities and Learning” and “Philosophy 241:Introductory Ethics” vary substantially when it comes to the number of students receiving A’s.
“In many courses shown in the charts, the grade distributions of the multiple sections are similar,” Beck said in his 2004 report. “In some other courses, the distribution of grades varies considerably between sections of the same course.”
Beck noted real differences in student abilities might account for some of this variation. The other source of variation, however, could be differences in instructor grading practices.
The report shows that 90 percent of students in one section of Educational Psychology 301 received A’s in the fall of 2003, while only 20 percent in another section of the same course received A’s.
In Philosophy 241 of the same semester, 55 percent of students in one section received A’s, while 12 percent of the other section received A’s.
Other courses are more consistent in grade distribution, according to the report.
“Economics 102: Principles-Macroeconomics” had comparable numbers across three different lectures. Roughly 20 percent of students in all three sections received A’s and nearly 30 percent in all sections received Bs.
UW sophomore David Louks said that although the system is unfair, a good grade in a class is not necessarily indicative of a good teacher.
UW freshman Aaron Towne agreed.
“In the long term, the harder teacher [grader] would be better, but not if it ruins the short term,” Towne said.
Other students proposed new methods of grading style.
“If they’re doing the same material, then they should have the same tests,” UW freshman Scott Vick said.
Some students disapprove of inconsistent grading methods, especially given the importance of transcripts in applying to graduate school, Towne noted.
“I don’t think teachers would agree to it, but they have to consider the students’ side of it,” he said. “Grade point average matters so much.”
The report is available in the Provost’s office.
