Measuring Breeds Excellence
Why We Need A Better Way To Measure Academic Performance
Ravi Sethi
Issue date: 5/13/02 Section: Perspectives
- Page 1 of 1
I have heard many students express how they really like grade non-disclosure and how it helps them enjoy the school more. Grade non-disclosure helps us foster a more collaborative and stress-free community. I think it will also have the long-term cultural effect of making people feel more attached to the institution after they leave. Overall, most students feel very positive towards the system. But there is a downside.
All the students who attend the GSB are high achievers. Many students who worked hard for the 'A' in their first quarter, and happened to miss the cutoff by a few points, discovered that they could have worked half as hard and still gotten the same 'B'. This is because, with the forced curve, the spread for a 'B' is huge. Since people have many conflicting priorities on their time, they will naturally adjust priorities to adjust for the payoffs received. With grade non-disclosure, the payoff from receiving an 'A' has been diminished. If a student determines that spending 10 hours a week gives them a slight chance for an 'A', and if they miss it they get a 'B', the expected payoff from the time spent pays them the same benefit as if they worked just 5 hours. They will naturally switch to the 5-hour workload and move another priority up to fill the 5-hour hole they created, giving them an expected higher level of overall utility.
The grading system needs to be changed so that hard work receives adequate rewards. Instead of a flat 'A', 'B' and 'C' system the school needs to introduce an 'A', 'B+', 'B', 'B-', 'C+' and 'C' grading system. The school should retain the forced grading curve since this protects against grade inflation. This new grading system will allow for more differentiation between the students and provide an incentive to work hard, even if you know that you are not going to get an 'A'.
This change will allow students to receive some payoff for working hard because they will not be rewarded at the same rate as someone who works half as hard. Even with grade non-disclosure, there is a personal satisfaction that comes from personal achievement. By introducing some sort of payment for amount learned, people will be induced to spend more time achieving and academics will be moved upward on many students' priority lists.
The GSB is known for its academic excellence and steps need to be taken to protect that differentiator. I think higher-grade differentiation succeeds in that task without reducing the benefits received from grade non-disclosure and the forced curve. We can keep our reputation for excellence and also increase our standing on the traits we are perceived as weak. We do not need to lower one attribute to raise another.
All the students who attend the GSB are high achievers. Many students who worked hard for the 'A' in their first quarter, and happened to miss the cutoff by a few points, discovered that they could have worked half as hard and still gotten the same 'B'. This is because, with the forced curve, the spread for a 'B' is huge. Since people have many conflicting priorities on their time, they will naturally adjust priorities to adjust for the payoffs received. With grade non-disclosure, the payoff from receiving an 'A' has been diminished. If a student determines that spending 10 hours a week gives them a slight chance for an 'A', and if they miss it they get a 'B', the expected payoff from the time spent pays them the same benefit as if they worked just 5 hours. They will naturally switch to the 5-hour workload and move another priority up to fill the 5-hour hole they created, giving them an expected higher level of overall utility.
The grading system needs to be changed so that hard work receives adequate rewards. Instead of a flat 'A', 'B' and 'C' system the school needs to introduce an 'A', 'B+', 'B', 'B-', 'C+' and 'C' grading system. The school should retain the forced grading curve since this protects against grade inflation. This new grading system will allow for more differentiation between the students and provide an incentive to work hard, even if you know that you are not going to get an 'A'.
This change will allow students to receive some payoff for working hard because they will not be rewarded at the same rate as someone who works half as hard. Even with grade non-disclosure, there is a personal satisfaction that comes from personal achievement. By introducing some sort of payment for amount learned, people will be induced to spend more time achieving and academics will be moved upward on many students' priority lists.
The GSB is known for its academic excellence and steps need to be taken to protect that differentiator. I think higher-grade differentiation succeeds in that task without reducing the benefits received from grade non-disclosure and the forced curve. We can keep our reputation for excellence and also increase our standing on the traits we are perceived as weak. We do not need to lower one attribute to raise another.