Sofia Cipriano’s article on grade inflation at Princeton (“A’s Are Rising at Princeton, With No Change in Sight”) brings limited insight to a problem that leaps into view in her opening sentence: “Two-thirds of Princeton course grades are in the A range.” Nor is that problem better addressed by professor Rowley’s concern that grade inflation “blurs the distinction between work that is adequate and work that is exceptional.”
The real issue has nothing to do with “adequate.” It has to do with the distinction between “very good” and “exceptional.” The grade of B+ addresses precisely that distinction.
Professor Gleason’s response is likewise disheartening. “If you set out clear guidelines, give students clear feedback, and show them how to achieve what you’ve asked them to achieve,” he argues, “then they’ll get the grades they deserve.” Presumably an A.
As one who taught excellent students at a first-rate college for 45 years, I never thought my A’s were a reward for paying attention to guidelines, feedback, and what I was asking for. What is “exceptional” in that? An A is for being surprised — perhaps moved or even disturbed— by a student’s fresh, compelling, and (in some measure) unanticipated approach to the challenges the course has posed.
But the most disheartening note in Cipriano’s article is struck by the president of the Undergraduate Student Government. This young man sees no problem at all: “As Princeton has gotten more and more selective,” he proclaims, “the kids who get here are going to be more and more committed to academics, more and more prepared to handle Princeton's level of rigor.”
Just plain better students than previous ones: This claim — blithely assuming that what’s past is prologue and that true superiority has now arrived — is “whig history” at its finest. I’d give it at least a B+.
Sofia Cipriano’s article on grade inflation at Princeton (“A’s Are Rising at Princeton, With No Change in Sight”) brings limited insight to a problem that leaps into view in her opening sentence: “Two-thirds of Princeton course grades are in the A range.” Nor is that problem better addressed by professor Rowley’s concern that grade inflation “blurs the distinction between work that is adequate and work that is exceptional.”
The real issue has nothing to do with “adequate.” It has to do with the distinction between “very good” and “exceptional.” The grade of B+ addresses precisely that distinction.
Professor Gleason’s response is likewise disheartening. “If you set out clear guidelines, give students clear feedback, and show them how to achieve what you’ve asked them to achieve,” he argues, “then they’ll get the grades they deserve.” Presumably an A.
As one who taught excellent students at a first-rate college for 45 years, I never thought my A’s were a reward for paying attention to guidelines, feedback, and what I was asking for. What is “exceptional” in that? An A is for being surprised — perhaps moved or even disturbed— by a student’s fresh, compelling, and (in some measure) unanticipated approach to the challenges the course has posed.
But the most disheartening note in Cipriano’s article is struck by the president of the Undergraduate Student Government. This young man sees no problem at all: “As Princeton has gotten more and more selective,” he proclaims, “the kids who get here are going to be more and more committed to academics, more and more prepared to handle Princeton's level of rigor.”
Just plain better students than previous ones: This claim — blithely assuming that what’s past is prologue and that true superiority has now arrived — is “whig history” at its finest. I’d give it at least a B+.