 |
| Dr. Wojciech Mrozek |
Paradoxically, the inflation of grades in the U.S.
universities and colleges is neither about the grades nor their inflation. If this was the case, then the solution could
be straightforward: since the grades are inflated, one just has to lower every
grade from A to B, from B to C and so on. Yet, the solution is not that simple,
because the problem is bigger than the grades. I would argue that the problem
is directly related to the crisis of the educational system.
What is the purpose of education? Why do we learn?
Why do people pay money (in some cases a substantial amount of money) in order
to attend a school? The typical answers to those questions are as follow: “I
need that degree to earn more money.” “I need to graduate to advance in my career.”
“I have to become more competitive in
the job market.” To be honest, those statements are perfectly fine, but they cannot
be the main reasons why we learn. Yet, as
long as we choose to answer those questions in a very pragmatic way, we will
face the problem of focusing our attention on the highest possible grades
earned. In other words, as long as education is seen as a commodity that can
simply be bought and sold, or as an investment that can bring about a certain
profit, then the grades are going to be the most important part of the learning
process. The investments must pay off
the highest interests, meaning the highest grades because the investor expects
the highest profit (the highest grades), and the institutions of higher education
do not want to disappoint their investors (students). If that is the case, then
the students, whether labeled as consumers or investors, would demand the
highest possible grades and challenge any grade that does not fulfill their expectations.
The outcome of such an approach is the “entitlement attitude” on the part of
the students, and the “compliance attitude” on the part of the educational
institution. Yet, I strongly believe that education is not a commodity, it has
value in itself and the grades should be seen as a byproduct and not the main
focus of the learning process.
Furthermore, I believe that education is not simply
about teaching. It is primarily about
learning. Education is not merely
about what I teach, but it is more
about what you learn. I believe that
if the emphasis is on the latter, then the pressure of getting the highest
grade would be minimized, and the students would gradually realize that the
goal of education is not purely the final grade (which still is important), but
the comprehension and skills they have discovered through their learning
experience.
Unfortunately, there is not a simple solution to the
problem of grade inflation. However, I believe that the initial step that may
lead to a gradual solution is to change the focus of education from earning
grades or degrees to learning and experiencing something new. If the students
(and the instructors) increasingly change the focus from the grades to the
learning process, then, I believe, we are on the right path. Instead of asking,
“What grade did I get” one should ask, “What have I learned?” “How can I
improve?” “Have I really achieved my best?”
Of course, we still needs grades, we have to
recognize the achievements and accomplishments of every individual learner. The
question is how to do it?
In every human interaction, there is a certain tension
between subjectivity and objectivity. The relationship between
the students and the instructor is not excluded from this tension. Yet, subjectivity
is not only the problem of the instructor who is grading a paper; the student
has his or her subjective interpretation too. Now, the question transforms into:
Can any grade be ever objective?
There is a further tension between objectivity and fairness. Which grade is objective? Which grade is fair? Does
objective mean fair? What should we emphasize, objectivity or fairness? Should
we pay attention to both?
Another tension is between the process of learning
and the final product. While grading,
are we looking at the final product or at the process? Are we rewarding just
the basic value of the assignment or the work involved in accomplishing the
assignment? Are we helping the student to achieve his/her best potentials (thus
learning) or just judging the final paper? (I do not even know who wrote the
final paper. See: The Chronicle of Higher
Education, November 12, 2010. The Shadow Scholar. The man who writes your students' papers tells his story.)
Still another tension is between the uniqueness and individuality of every
student and the standardization of the
students’ achievements. We live in a society where individuality is highly
regarded, almost essential to our identity as human beings. On the other hand,
when it comes to education, we have standardized, numeric tests to define the
value of a particular achievement, which effectively destroy individuality.
If the goal of education is achieving certain
standards, then what should the standards be? Should it be the accomplishment
of certain numeric values? Or the standard should be defined in terms of learning,
widening horizons, growing and experiencing oneself and the outside world in a
new and a very personal and individual way? The question is then, how do we measure
the achievements? How do we recognize the individual accomplishments?
Dr. Mrozek is an adjunct instructor with Centenary College's School of Professional Studies; he teaches courses in Religion, Philosophy, and Academic Foundations.
