Princeton Giving Up on Using Grades As Motivation and Feedback?

“That is my worry.  I will state my position as briefly as I can:  If the same material is taught to similar students, then the times it is taught with a higher standard for an A, B, etc…. will be the times that, on average, more students will learn more.  Now on to what is happening at Princeton.

The Daily Princeton reported that the university had tasked a committee with reviewing their strict grading guidelines. http://dailyprincetonian.com/news/2013/10/princeton-announces-committee-to-review-controversial-grade-deflation-policy/

My view of this is summed up in my comment on a recent article in The Daily Princetonian http://dailyprincetonian.com/news/2014/02/grading-policy-survey-first-step-in-committees-deliberations/

When I read the first article about the Ad Hoc Committee, I gave it the “bad bankers, bad credit raters, bad bonds” test. In other words, I essentially replaced “Princeton” with “Fitch”, “President” with “CEO”, “students” with “customers”, etc… Here is what I got.

(ADAPTATION of http://dailyprincetonian.com/n… to a fictional bond rating scenario.)

F&P (The Highly Regarded Bond Rating Agency) Announces Committee to Review Controversial Rating Policies

F&P’s new CEO says he has formed a committee to review the company’s rating policies. The present policies had been put in place a few years ago and restricted the granting of a F&P rating of A, or higher, to fewer companies.

The new CEO acknowledged that the company marketing and contracting director had told him that the rating policy might be affecting the number of negotiated contracts that were eventually signed, since the policy has become part of F&P’s image for customers considering contracting with F&P.

A committee has been tasked by the new CEO to reevaluate F&P’s rating policies, taking into account customer feedback on the policy and the impact it may have oncustomers’ ability to convince investors that their finances are in good order.

The rating policyhad been put into effect as a response to perceived “rating inflation” by some of the company’s raters. At the time of the policy’s adoption, F&P’s management had hoped that other rating companies would follow F&P’s lead but they didn’t. Other rating agencies are stillgiving ratings of A, or above, to far more companies than F&P’s policy would have allowed….

[END of adpaptation]

Students as consumers permeates much of higher education. And it matters. As David Riesman noted,

“…the “wants” of students to which competing institutions, departments, and individual faculty members cater are quite different from the “needs” of students…” (From On Higher Education: The Academic Enterprise in an Era of Rising Student.1980)

Princeton’s attitudes do not stay at Princeton. If you want to see how it filters through to even highly ranked wannabes, just read “How Competition Leads to “Content Deflation” in One Anecdote” on my blog inside-higher-ed.com.  To see how the “student as consumer” problem was dealt with earlier at Chicago, read “Content Deflation” Part II:  University of Chicago Felt the Heat”

I hope the Princeton faculty will rise to the challenge the way the Chicago faculty did.  It matters to everyone.”