Class Peers / Institution Wide
Peer Ranking Only
Upon adoption of the plan presented, grade inflation ends immediately. Without grades there can be no grade inflation. The possibility of numerical inflation replacing grade inflation is held in check through the process of normalizing class averages against class average ACT (or SAT) scores. The use of a ranking system which sets the class average equal to 0 removes incentive to inflate academic performance beyond reality. In addition, clear and accurate feedback is given to students showing both their academic strengths and also their weaknesses.
When academic assessment becomes sufficiently well defined by the accreditation agencies, content of all courses throughout higher education will be detailed in master syllabi. This is the first step in removing grade disparity. Most likely, master syllabi already exist in the vast majority of cases. Course content is then distributed to all students in the form of course syllabi which convey clear and meaningful expectations of the extent of learning to be accomplished. This is normally based on textbook content as well as additional academic work detailed in the course syllabus. This practice is now well established. Objective evaluation of academic performance by individual instructors can then proceed in an environment free of incentives to inflate performance scores. This is not in current practice. Only in such an environment can the issue of grade disparity be brought under control.
Incentive toward learning is expected to improve by the removal of extrinsic motivation in the form of letter grades. Noted education writer Alfie Kohn repeatedly refers to the body of Social Science literature which points in this direction. Given the volume of studies that Mr. Kohn refers to, the issue should be defined as theory rather than as individual research findings. Desire to learn is intrinsic.
We believe that the transcript shown below meets all three goals for academic assessment as now defined by The Higher Learning Commission. In addition, it meets the two additional goals of removing grade disparity and providing much improved feedback to students. In doing so, it is preferable to the current situation, a situation that has become circular in that grade inflation feeds grade disparity which in turn feeds more grade inflation. Under the plan presented faculty become facilitators of learning. Currently they attempt to enforce the legitimacy of the grade scale as well as meet vague and ill-defined demands of the accreditation agencies for academic assessment. Academic assessment has been in existence for approximately 15 years and still does not formerly recognize the issues of grade inflation and grade disparity. For further problems associated with use of grades follow this link.
| Academic Transcript | SAMPLE | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Student: | John Doe | Copyright 2002 | |
| Academic Major: | Chemistry | All Rights Reserved |
| Student Score | Current Institutional Average | National Average | |
| ACT | 25 | 20 | 21 |
| General Education Examination | 84% | 70% | 72% |
| Academic Major Examination | 86% | 83% | 84% |
| Course | Class Average ACT | Student Score | Class Average | Class Range | Student Percentile Rank | Instructor Evaluation Basis for Percentile Ranking: Class Peers / Institution Wide | Student Ranking in Class Range: Peer Ranking Only |
| Biology | 17 | 88% | 46% | 21%-90% | +14% | X | 97.8% |
| Algebra | 23 | 87% | 64% | 37%-90% | +23% | X | 96.7% |
| History | 19 | 89% | 77% | 50%-95% | +12% | X | 93.7% |
| Chemistry | 26 | 86% | 85% | 81%-89% | +12% | X | 96.6% | Sociology | 18 | 95% | 86% | 77%-97% | +09% | X | 97.9% |
| SemesterAverages | 20.6 | 89% | 71.6% | 53.2%-92.2% | +14% | | 96.54% |
| Current Institutional Average For All Classes: 74% | |||||||
| Course | Class Average ACT | Student Score | Class Average | Class Range | Student Percentile Rank | Instructor Evaluation Basis for Percentile Ranking: Class Peers / Institution Wide | Student Ranking in Class Range: Peer Ranking Only |
| Chemistry II | 26 | 65% | 65% | 25%-78% | -08% | X | 83.3% |
| English Lit. | 21 | 79% | 76% | 40%-80% | +03% | X | 91.9% |
| English Comp. | 20 | 73% | 76% | 42%-85% | -03% | X | 85.9% |
| Calculus | 24 | 92% | 83% | 60%-92% | +19% | X | 100.0% |
| Semester Averages | 22.7 | 77.2% | 75% | 47.4%-87.9% | +02.7% | | 90.27% |
| Cumulative Averages | 21.6% | 83.1% | 73.3% | 47.4%-87.9% | +08.3% | | 93.4% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current Institutional Average For All Classes: 73% | |||||||
Algebra. The instructor likely teaches a rigorous course and expects a lower class average because of it. The class average falls within guidelines presented in the syllabus, and peer ranking is used. The possibility exists that the instructor is inferior in teaching. This possibility can be detected from the transcript because of the low class average. Evaluation of teaching can be done by peer faculty.
History. Again the class average falls within guidelines set in the course syllabus. Peer ranking is invoked.
Chemistry. Students exceed the expectations of the instructor as given in the syllabus. The external evaluation in the form of the class average ACT is consistent with this higher class average. The instructor moves the class to institutional wide ranking and the average student in chemistry acquires +11%, (85% - 74%).
Sociology. Sociology is practicing numerical inflation. This is evident by comparing the class average ACT to the institutional wide ACT and also the class average to the current institutional average for all courses. Although John scores well in Sociology, John gains his lowest percentile ranking points. In this case the proper response occurs. The faculty member is notified that numerical inflation hurts students.
English Literature. Again peer ranking seems appropriate for the same reasons occurring in Algebra and History above.
English Composition. John is somewhat below average. Peer ranking is appropriate given the class average and the class ACT average. John is at the 85.9% level in the class range, (obtained by 73%/ 85%). Closer examination of the English component of the general education exam would add greater clarity to John’s command of English, including writing ability.
Calculus. The instructor sees that student performance is high and uses institutional wide ranking. John is at the top of his class as shown by his ranking of 100%. His score on the mathematics portion of the general education exam is also expected to be high. Class averages for both the ACT and student performance are also above institution wide scores. Ranking seems appropriate.
NOTE: The personal evaluation of the instructor may appear in some other format than that of peer versus institutional ranking. One alternative is simply to show what numerical class average is expected of the class by the instructor.
Because of value added through the educational process, the ACT (or SAT) likely has validity of only limited duration, perhaps the first three or possibly four semesters. Truman University in Kirksville, MO has experience with this issue. The Initiative to End Grade Inflation intends to explore this. The Academic Profile Test is currently in widespread usage to assess the general education component of the curriculums and can be used for the normalizing process. A much improved General Education exam focusing on the key areas of English, Mathematics, and Computer Science can also be used.
Additional information can be added to the transcript as deemed necessary by society. One possibility is a record of class attendance.