We have Yale University to thank for many things, one of which is the precursor to our current grading system.
In 1785, 58 students were separated into various descriptive categories, named in Latin of course, based on the level of their work, according to Indiana University. This spawned the 4.0 system we use today.
And though this system was created by some of the best of its time, it is now in dire need of an overhaul, or at least customization by professors.
Is an English literature curriculum the same as a groundwater hydrology course? No. Yet, we use the same system to grade them. I understand the need for grading uniformity.
It would be a logistic nightmare to begin creating unique grading systems for each degree, not to mention each specialty within that degree.
Yet, I believe that some customization is necessary for both the students and the university to grow.
Think of the breakdown for a typical senior level course — around four tests, a large project that is most likely with a group, various homework and quizzes.
Multiply that by four, and that is a tremendous amount of workload to thrust upon students when failing one or two tests could mean retaking a class.
There is a reason that test anxiety affects nearly everyone.
Griffen Winget | Argonaut
Each time I walk into a test, especially if I need to get a certain grade, I get butterflies in my stomach and my mind can’t help but run through every worst-case scenario.
The root of that anxiety comes from the 4.0 grading system.
Society today focuses on spreading messages about self-love and accepting that each one of us is unique.
Yet, for our formative years and into the first steps of our adult lives, we are labeled A-F and told that some people are better than others just because they are better at taking tests or speaking in front of the class.
Skills like public speaking are important, but when a system puts so much emphasis on tests that failure affects their self-image, then the system fails us.
Our current grading structure tries to judge how well a student understands the material and categorize them based on that understanding.
This is not an inherently bad thing, making sure that students don’t fall behind is key to growing successful adults.
The system fails when a student understands the material but variables like test anxiety prevent them from properly expressing understanding.
That is where the customization comes in. Something as simple as an appropriate test alternative could catch those students that can’t express their understanding.
My brother suffers from this exact premise, he can’t do well on a test to save his life, but he consistently performs well on homework and essays.
Eventually, the teacher sat down with him and allowed him to take the test verbally. That way, he was not constrained by time or inability to put his thoughts into writing.
His test scores rose dramatically.
This is just one alternative and I am sure there are many more out there being implemented in niche cases.
Some may argue that a professor wouldn’t have the time to sit down with each individual student, that is what the testing center is there for.
The university isn’t starved for funds. If it is for the good of the students, then alternative testing resources can be created.
Unfortunately, I don’t see changes on this scale happening for quite some time. It would take a few universities testing it before the masses would adopt anything new.
Griffen Winget can be reached at[email protected] or on twitter @GriffenW