The College Hill Independent

Back

Grade "Inflation" Does Not Exist
The economics—or lack thereof—of the grading system
. . . by Ari Savitzky
[Illustration by Molly Ball]

Grade inflation is the current boogieman of academia. Unfortunately, the ‘great debate’ at Brown over the future of the New Curriculum, the addition of pluses and/or minuses, and the perceived national overabundance of A’s, has a particularly myopic view of why and how grades became inflated in the first place.

Some casually connect the root of the issue to the ambiguity in Brown’s grading system and claim that pluses and minuses are a sure cure for inflated averages. Many weigh incidents and anecdotes from their humanities classes last semester against secondhand reports from friends or the news media about grade inflation at Harvard and at other elite institutions. The term “grade inflation,” though bandied about a great deal, is seldom defined and less often substantiated.

So, at the risk of sounding illegitimately authoritative (or authoritatively illegitimate), I’d like to declare the current grade inflation problem an issue of semantics, standards and social change. Forces acting upon the nation’s higher-ed elites have propelled averages upward, true. But the idea that grades are worth less—a critical component in the argument that grade inflation exists—is unfounded.

Karl marks
In economics, inflation describes the devaluation of currency over time. Inflation is an economic fact of life in the United States, as well as in any other commercial economy. It’s why you can’t get lunch, a ballgame, and trolley fare for a dime anymore.

So are grades being inflated, like currency, and losing value? This seems to be the implication made by anti-grade-inflationists. But here we run into the essential problem of treating grades like currency. Grades aren’t uniform in any of the ways currency must be.

Here, many might cite legitimate and oft-made points: that hard work has intrinsic value, and that learning exists ideally for learning’s sake. But even in economic terms, we cannot assume grades to have money’s uniform scalar value. An A in one class is not necessarily an A in another, as any professor, student, employer or admissions officer can probably tell you. The value of a grade depends on the individual, the evaluator of that individual, the professor, and the use for which it is being evaluated.

At this point, anyone even moderately informed on academia’s current woes will play the numbers, noting the undeniable upward change in the number of B’s and A’s at top universities over the last 30 years. Pointing to rising averages, they’ll note conclusively that more people are getting A’s than in 1960.

Ultimately, however, these arguments are meaningless. The relevant question as to grade inflation is not the change in the amount of A’s or B’s given, but in the quality of work and achievement that they represent. While it’s easy to prove that more students—especially at the nation’s best universities—are getting high marks, it is nearly impossible to prove that they don’t deserve them, or that they didn’t work as hard as their predecessors for the same high marks.

Check amongst yourselves
Seen from this angle, the phenomenon of grade “inflation”—or, more accurately, the rising amount of high grades given—is easily the result of broad social trends. The idea that generations of students grow continually better at meeting the academic standards of the previous cohort is not a new one. But the rate of growth in the number of places at top universities has been outpaced by the growth rate of talented American high school students. Furthermore, rapid globalization affords more and more international students a chance to compete for a place in the freshman class of the top U.S. schools.

The result: Increasingly intelligent students are competing more and more heatedly for fewer spots at top tier schools. Thus, it’s natural that more students would receive better marks—the concentration of students capable of receiving the best marks has swelled.

Of course, all of this necessitates a particular view about the nature of grades. In a class with a predetermined number, or percentage, of A’s, B’s, and C’s, the argument that more students are capable of getting A’s falls flat on its face. However, most classes don’t use such a grading system. Even in classes with a curve, bell or otherwise, more capable students will ultimately mean a higher proportion scoring in the top range. Rising averages and burgeoning crops of A’s are thus best explained by the social pressures on American universities, rather than by the dropping value of the marks themselves.

Brunonia inflated?
But what of Brown? Lately much ado has been made about the addition of pluses and minuses to Brown’s grading system. Anti-grade-inflationists had led the charge, claiming that pluses and minuses would lower “inflated” grades by allowing professors more specific grading options. But the relative abundance of A’s and B’s is a problem of distribution and standards, not diminishing grade value. Pluses and minuses will not make a B worth more on the whole—ultimately, the combined average of B pluses, B’s and B minuses will approximate a B. This consistent average of all B’s will be reflected in a consistent average GPA, with or without pluses or minuses. Thus, pluses and minuses will clarify and stratify grades at an individual level, but do little to decrease the average GPA, the benchmark measurement of grade inflation.

Moreover, schools with less ambiguous grading systems—most notably Harvard—still ‘suffer’ from grade inflation. Brown’s average GPA can in fact be seen as only moderately inflated relative to other schools, in light of the average-boosting S/NC option, which allows students to opt out of a grade in a course in which they may not have done “well.”

The point is that rising averages—regardless of Brown’s unique grading system—aren’t necessarily a sign of devaluation, and furthermore, aren’t necessarily bad.

Economists have a tough time explaining why inflation is always harmful to the country’s economy. The best answer lies in the idea that, even if wages and prices shift to accommodate inflation, unchecked inflation creates unstable and ultimately worthless currency. By linking the developing changes in grade distribution to a potentially debilitating, yet common economic phenomenon, interested parties have caused a panic. Universities, suddenly feeling their academic integrities at risk, have responded with pomp and PR.

It is thusly that we find our academic world in its present state, confused and assaulted by neo-‘marks’ists. What must be realized is that the quality of overall work done by undergraduates has improved ‘mark’edly over the past 20 years, while the standard, to the extent that it is at all objective, has stayed the same.

Inflated diction
A recent article in Brown Alumni magazine lamented the decline of the ‘C.’ The mark that stood for competence in Dubya’s Yale years has become the kiss of death for transcript-minded go-getters. The real solution to grade inflation, to the extent that it needs solving, is a change in standards, one in which the students are the big losers. Only a concerted effort to bring back the ‘C’ will return A’s to their station of rarity.

Thankfully (for my GPA), there are other forces at work here. Because of inter-university competition, it seems unlikely that the current situation will lead to a standards shift and a revival of the ‘C’. Colleges understand the short-term hit they’ll take—in incoming applications, student relations, and job placement—if they’re the first to start issuing C’s en masse.

The point here: don’t listen to recycled blather about grade inflation and falling standards. Grade inflation is more statistical illusion than academic malady. In fact, a healthier view sees rising averages as a sign of strength—proof that students are really getting better and brighter.

Recently, the hype—that top schools dole out high marks for little effort—has been granted a shocking legitimacy by national pundits and hoopla artists. Meanwhile, universities will probably continue commissioning studies and committees as long as their insecurities are preyed upon. But the figment of inflation cannot remain indefinitely cloaked. The sooner we debase the notion of grade inflation, the sooner public and university attention can focus on a host of real issues.

Ari Savitzky B’06 remembers longingly the day when you could get a hamburger and tea, kidney pie, a ‘talkie’ and trolley fare to the Polo grounds for three cents.

Back to Indy Home