Making the Grade
Jason Jagatic `02
Issue date: 4/27/01 Section: Viewpoints
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Grading will likely always be a “popular”, if not sensitive, discussion topic at the Johnson School. Some students love the current system, while others feel that it is less than optimal. Based primarily on the concerns of students, Dean Swieringa and Associate Dean Elliott established the Grading Task Force last March to investigate the Johnson School’s current grading policy and if/how it should be improved. The final report was recently released and can be accessed in full (see “Grading Report” under the Academic Resources category) on the Johnson School intranet.
The task force that put together the report consisted of three Johnson School faculty members: John McClain, Barbara Mink, and Mark Nelson (Chair). Their mission was to investigate possible issues stemming from our current grading system (such as stress, recruiting, course selection) and how our system compares against other Top 10 business schools. The task force solicited feedback from all key stakeholders: students, faculty, recruiters and administration. The SFC facilitated student input by arranging meetings between task-force members and focus groups, as well as by assisting in the development and administration of a survey of all students. Almost 200 students from the classes of 2000 and 2001 provided input to the task force.
The task force focused on the appropriateness of the current plus/minus letter grade system and grade disclosure policy. (The school is legally unable to release grades to any party; however, other schools also forbid the students themselves from sharing their grades with recruiters). Upon completing the study, the task force recommended that the grading policy of the school remain one of plus/minus letter grades and allow student disclosure of grades. The task force made several suggestions (some of which have already been implemented) that are designed to improve how the grading system operates. The task force found that the Johnson School’s 13-level scale (A+ to D- and F) was similar in many respects to other schools’ policies. While many schools claim to use a pass/fail system, they typically offer 5 or 6 levels of differentiation (e.g. Excellent, High Pass, Pass, Low Pass, Fail), which are functionally equivalent to an A through F scale.
The task force that put together the report consisted of three Johnson School faculty members: John McClain, Barbara Mink, and Mark Nelson (Chair). Their mission was to investigate possible issues stemming from our current grading system (such as stress, recruiting, course selection) and how our system compares against other Top 10 business schools. The task force solicited feedback from all key stakeholders: students, faculty, recruiters and administration. The SFC facilitated student input by arranging meetings between task-force members and focus groups, as well as by assisting in the development and administration of a survey of all students. Almost 200 students from the classes of 2000 and 2001 provided input to the task force.
The task force focused on the appropriateness of the current plus/minus letter grade system and grade disclosure policy. (The school is legally unable to release grades to any party; however, other schools also forbid the students themselves from sharing their grades with recruiters). Upon completing the study, the task force recommended that the grading policy of the school remain one of plus/minus letter grades and allow student disclosure of grades. The task force made several suggestions (some of which have already been implemented) that are designed to improve how the grading system operates. The task force found that the Johnson School’s 13-level scale (A+ to D- and F) was similar in many respects to other schools’ policies. While many schools claim to use a pass/fail system, they typically offer 5 or 6 levels of differentiation (e.g. Excellent, High Pass, Pass, Low Pass, Fail), which are functionally equivalent to an A through F scale.