Grading and Moral Hazard

James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal ^ | October 24, 2024 | John Staddon

[karpov]

As political pressures for equity—equality of outcome—have grown in recent years, traditional methods of evaluating college students have come under threat. As the proportion of the population going to college has increased, the proportion of students who are not equipped to succeed has also increased.

Dealing with an increasing number of marginal students in an equity-charged environment is one factor that has favored grade inflation. But there is a contributing factor that is built into the American system and has taken some years to reach fruition. When I first came to this country from Britain, I was surprised to find that students were graded by the individual who taught them. This obviously introduces a conflict of interest, especially for teachers of elective courses. Harsh grades mean a drop in enrollment. A drop in enrollment means a loss of salary for the tenured, or of a job for adjunct faculty. Given the incentives, I am surprised that grade inflation has taken so long to become a problem.

The contrast with British practice was stark. At that time (the 1960s), pupils’ futures were decided by two sets of high-stakes exams: Ordinary Level, taken at 16, and Advanced Level, at 18 or so. After O-level, a good pass meant you could go on to A-level two years later and then, possibly, to college (maybe five percent or so of each cohort made it to college in those days, so the process was very selective).

These vital examinations took place in a separate location, “examination halls” (mine was in South Kensington in central London). Students, identified not by name but by a number, from schools all over the city, sat at widely separated tables patrolled by a gowned “invigilator.”

[DeplorablePaul]

Back in the day, I had a few classes where the teacher allowed us to grade ourselves. Mostly electives. I got all As. I was more satisfied with the Bs I had to work for.

[Uncle Miltie]

“Equity” means stealing from productive whitey and giving to lazy blackey.

[The Great RJ]

Back in my college days half a century ago, admission was heavily based on college entrance exams like SAT or ACT and grades in high school classes like science and math. There were few government loans and one had to work to pay tuition or have parents willing to pay the bill. A college degree actually meant something.

Now government backed college loans are easy to get and admission to many schools is all but guaranteed. Students are frequently poorly prepared for higher education and can pursue worthless degrees in peace studies or similar junk programs with little concern over grades or flunking out. Even the burden of paying back these loans is now being eased if not eliminated by the government. In the US college students seem to have ample time to protest, engage in ridiculous pursuits and not have any concern about scholarship