Readers of a certain age will recall a time when academic grades reflected actual achievement, when sports awards recognized genuine athletic prowess, and when most young people contented themselves with residing outside the bright circle of popular acclaim.
But all that has changed. Where a grade of C used to stand for competent but uninspired work, it now stands in place of D or F, either of which is viewed as an academic nuclear button. Participation trophies are the norm in baseball and soccer, lest some children feel less accomplished than others—even if they are.
To make matters worse, instructors are under pressure to not only inflate students’ grades but to write glowing recommendations, even if this forces their testimonials into the realm of fiction or fantasy. In a few celebrated cases, disgruntled students and parents filed lawsuits against instructors who dared to issue a grade the student actually earned.
Many instructors have given up the fight and acquiesced to the new normal. They simply don’t believe it’s worth subjecting themselves to angry calls, pressure from administrators, and the specter of litigation. But more than that, they may rationalize that grade inflation is necessary for those good but unexceptional students who will find themselves competing with other good but unexceptional students. If students from other schools enjoy the benefit of inflated grades and fancifully written recommendations, why should their own students appear lackluster because they were honestly evaluated?
What should a teacher do? Provide an honest assessment, or go with the flow of inflated grades and hyperbolic reference letters?
Grapple with the Gray
List two or three reasons for grading honestly.
List two or three reasons for inflating the grades.
Is there another alternative?
Having weighed the options, as a teacher what would you do?
Gray Matters
This problem offers a singular dilemma. Grade and recommendation inflation hurts everyone, particularly the student it supposes to help. Genuinely talented or hardworking students are not distinguished for their accomplishments above their mediocre peers. Weaker students may gain admission to programs which they are not equipped to succeed in. Selection staff lose the ability to differentiate between one student and another; consequently, they are unable to make informed admissions decisions.
However, once the problem exists, it hardly seems equitable that a few students should suffer at the hands of one honest evaluator while the majority benefit from a broken system.
Philosophically, any instructor who participates in grade and recommendation inflation is complicit in undermining standards of educational integrity. But again, philosophy will not help the unfortunate student who has the bad luck to draw an honest evaluator.
Perhaps a partial solution is for principled instructors to decline writing recommendations for any students about whom they are less than enthusiastic. No doubt, a student who is turned away by one teacher will find other teachers willing to substitute fact with fiction. This itself raises the more nuanced problem of encouraging students to shop around for whatever authority will enable them to manipulate the system.
More to the point, this solution won’t help with grading. Teachers can decline to give grades to average students. Nevertheless, it’s likely that any teacher who grades honestly across the board will acquire a reputation for tough standards. If the teacher’s class is required, all students will be equally subject to those standards; if it is an elective, weaker students may elect not to take it.
As we’ve already seen, upholding ethical standards becomes more complicated when doing so comes at others’ expense, particularly when those others are trapped in an unethical system. Even so, simply giving up on educational standards seems a poor option for those who commit their lives to preparing the next generation to be successful contributors to society.