On the academic virtue of letter grading system in our educational institutions
The certification of the students academic performance with letter grades may not be consistent with the numerical assessments
Khandakar Qudrat-I Elahi
In Bangladesh, like all over the world, letter grades are nowadays used to certify students academic achievements. This system replaces the old examination system where students overall academic performances were certified based on their numerical scores. It is obvious that the new is believed to more rational in certifying the students academic performance in their program of study than the old one. This however may not the case. For, the certification of the students academic performance with letter grades may not be consistent with the numerical assessments originally made by individual instructors. The purpose of this article to expose this ignored truth.
The current letter grading system in Bangladesh may be described as follows.First, the full credit of each course is fixed at 100 marks. Then the total marks are distributed among several tests and assignments given throughout the semester, either institutionally or by the course teacher. Next, at the end of the semester, the concerned teacher aggregates all the numerical scores awarded for each test/assignment to sum up the students overall performance in the course. Finally, the teacher converts these numerical values into letter grades according to the rulesestablished by the institution. The instructor then sends the course mark-sheetto the office of the concerned authority. The concerned office tallies the numeral scores against the letter grades for ensuring the accuracy of conversion and then determines the students average semester performance by calculating GPA (grade point average).Students are awarded degree certificates for the program of their study by calculating cumulative grade point average (CGPA), which is simply the GPA of all courses completed during the program.
At our university, four letter grades are used: A, B, C, and D. A carries a value of 4, which is the highest grade achievable in any course. D is the passing grade that carries a value of 1. Each of these basic grades is divided into sub-grades by using plus and minus superscripts carrying different numerical values.
The grading procedure described above is a mixture of quantitative assessment, and qualitative and quantitative manipulation methods, which operates like this: The students learning performance in any course is first assessed quantitatively. Then letter grades carrying different ranges of assigned mark are used to convert this quantitative evaluation into qualitative manipulation.Since letters cannot be used to indicate the overall performance of a student, each letter grade is assigned a numerical value called grade point (GA). The calculated GPA thus certifies the overall academic performance of a student in her program of study.
Although the system seems very simple and scientific, it inherits a serious rationality issue: The overall academic performance of a student certified by her GPA may not reflect the original evaluation made by their teachers numerically.For, numerical grades represent specific arithmetic values while letter grades represent a range of arithmetic values. The numerical grade means exactly what the number indicates; each students academic performance is known with certainty. For example, two students are awarded 60 and 90 marks in a course and we are not supposed have any difficulty in recognising which student is a better achiever. On the other hand, the letter grades refer to specific ranges of marks, which means the students actual academic performance is not known in this system.
The logic behind this criticism is explained by the following table that describes the UGCs letter grading system prepared for all universities in Bangladesh.
Three points may be noted about the above table that will underline the irrationality introduced by the conversion of quantitative assessment into qualitative certification. First, letter grading distorts students performances in individual courses. For example, in the UGCs certification system, a student will be awarded A+ whether they score 80 or 100 marks. There is a 20-mark difference between the starting and terminal numerical values defining this grade range, which means that a student can qualify for an A+ by scoring 25% less marks than another student who made perfect scores in all courses. Quantitatively a student can score mark between 80 and 100, but qualitatively they be awarded only one GP, which is 4. The difference in the quality of performance between two students, one scoring 80 and the other 100 marks, is ostensibly obvious quantitatively. But, qualitatively their academic performance is same; they are both A+ students and both receive GPA 4.0.
Second, the letter grading system rewards all-rounder students but penalises studentsof differential skills. In real life, there are fewer all-rounder students, meaning the vast majority of students possess differential skills in different subjects of study.
Some students are good in mathematics and natural science subjects, while others are good in arts and social science subjects. Besides this skill difference, many external factors might cause variations in the students performance in different tests. Accordingly, the conversion of numerical values into letter grades could be prejudicial to most students. For,a student must receive CGPA of 4.0 in order to be certified as A+ performer. And she can receive the CGPA 4.0 only if she scores 80% or higher marks in all courses. This does not happen in case of numerical grading; because it represents specific number. A student can score any value between 80 and 100 to qualify for A+, but she will receive only GP 4.0 no matter what is her numerical performance. This means that the students must be all-rounders to be certified as excellent achievers in the letter grading system.
Third, the above irrationality inherent in the letter grading system can affect the students career path. Since the letter grading system may not certify most students real performance in their course of study, they could become prey to unintentional bias. This most certainly happen in case of admissions to post-secondary institutions after HSC examinations. It could also happen during the job selection process. Candidates with A+ certificates would be normally preferred to ones with lower letter grades. Yet, the original assessments conducted in different courses might tell different stories.
The letter grading systemscurrently followed at all levels of our educational system are hybrids of quantitative assessment and qualitative certification process. The system is theoretically irrational; and it could be practically highly punitive to most students for inheriting differential merits. Therefore, the system demands appropriate review from the concerned authority. This supposed review may be initiated by investigating the question: What kind of improvement does lettering grading really introduce in assessing and certifying the students academic achievements?
The writer, former Professor of Economics and Finance, Independent University Bangladesh, lives in Guelph, Ontario, Canada
