What we've got here is a failure to evaluate

This morning, I visited the SOCCCD “almanac,” and I checked out some of the curious info available there.

In particular, I came across a page that presents the distribution of grades in the various divisions and schools of our two colleges. (See Grade Distribution Matrix.)

For some reason, the matrix concerns only Spring ‘06, i.e., three years ago. But that's OK. I figure that, since the population of instructors doesn't change much from year to year (yes, we've done lots of hiring recently, but do the math), it is likely that these distributions are fairly constant. And so I would bet that the '09 distributions are close to these '06 distributions.

The most commonly assigned grade: A

Well, call me Mr. Oblivion, but I was amazed by what I found. “A” is by far the most common grade awarded, followed by “B,” then “C.”

Shouldn't the grade distribution resemble a bell curve? I.e., shouldn't A's be less common than B's, which in turn are less common than C's? Shouldn't C be the most applicable grade for the hoi polloi?


In the matrix, “F” grades are twice as common as “D” grades. That makes sense to me: my guess is that this reflects the large number of students who, upon doing poorly, simply bail, thereby ensuring an F even though, had they remained, they would have had a shot at a D or C.

E.g., Liberal Arts and Humanities:

Let’s look at some of the details, focusing--for no particular reason--on Saddleback's division of Liberal Arts and IVC's comparable School of Humanities and Languages. Why the hell not?

Saddleback College:
Liberal Arts:
6,981 grades given.
Grade distribution in percentages:

A: 34
B: 24 (A&B: 58%)
C: 12
D: 4
F: 7 (D&F: 11%)

Incomplete: 1
Credit: 14
No-credit: 5

Irvine Valley College:
Humanities and Languages:
5,027 grades given.
Grade distribution in percentages:

A: 31
B: 21 (A&B: 52%)
C: 12
D: 4
F: 9 (D&F: 13%)

Incomplete: 0
Credit: 13
No-credit: 9

Gosh, Saddleback instructors sure do hand out lots of A’s! But IVC faculty manage a pretty close 2nd in the "A" giveaway sweepstakes.

"Ah," you say, "nobody's surprised when humanities instructors give away A's. What about the other areas of the colleges?"

Here, then, is the data per college:

Saddleback College:

A: 37
B: 23 (A&B: 60%)
C: 15
D: 5
F: 11 (D&F: 16%)

I: 0
C: 7
NC: 2

Irvine Valley College:

A: 35
B: 19 (A&B: 54%)
C: 13
D: 5
F: 12 (D&F: 17%)

I: 0
C: 10
NC: 6

Click on image to enlarge

When we look at the colleges as a whole, the "A" giveaway phenomenon gets worse, not better.

What we've got here is a failure to evaluate, or something like that. No way do these grades reflect the competence of actual students. Yes, yes, I know: some students do very well. They deserve their A's no matter how you cut it. But the vast majority of our students are, well, distinctly non-excellent. In truth, there should be lots of F's, D's, and C's. A's and B's should be relatively rare.

But, in fact, A's are by far the most common grade. (Note: at many private colleges, virtually all grades are A's and B's. Gradewise, compared to those institutions, community colleges look positively miserly!)

The pattern we are seeing here goes beyond "grade inflation," for instructors issue grades as though the vast "middle" of studentry were excellent and only outliers can be found on the trail down to B, then C, then D.

Preposterous!

Instructors enjoy playing "Santa Claus"?:

Tell me if I'm wrong: What we are seeing here is (a) a disinclination on the part of faculty to designate students' work "mediocre" or "average"--even when it is--and/or (b) an inclination on the part of faculty to designate students' work "excellent"--even when it isn't.

Call it the Santa factor--or the "Santa, and if not Santa, then at least not Mr. Meanie" factor.

It's everywhere!

Naturally, there are differences between areas: compare, say, the life sciences and, say, the social sciences. But these differences are not as dramatic as one might expect. Further, this perverse pattern or something nearly as odd afflicts all academic areas at our colleges.

Obviously, one would want to compare these distributions with those at other colleges. (My impression is that the teacher-as-Santa phenomenon is very common, but it is more pronounced at private colleges. For instance, at Brown University last year, a majority of undergraduate grades were A's,)

I wouldn't be surprised if we were to find pretty much a duplication of the above at other local districts. (If I find the time, I will look up the data.)

Whence giftage?

The reasons why instructors grade as they do are various and complex. It's not just the desire to play Santa (or to not play Satan). As we've noted previously, research shows that today's students expect to receive A's and B's just for showing up.

Really.

Hence, instructors who call a spade a spade pay an unceasing price in student anger and disgruntlement. That can be taxing.

And given the context of routine A giveaways, any instructor who gives A's and B's only to good students and assigns D's and F's to poor students will likely become unpopular.

Driving away students: that's no small thing. At the very least, it's bound to be demoralizing.

And then there's administrative "leadership":

Meanwhile, the community college system tacitly (explicitly?) promotes the idea that students can be fully employed, carry on a significant social life, and take a full load of courses all at the same time. After a while, students assume that doing little-to-no homework and attending half the scheduled classes is normal. Alas, that seems to be what many students are indeed assuming.

I've tried insisting that students do 6 hours of homework per class per week. Forgetaboutit.

And so our system daily promotes student decline and delusions of competence.

See also

Grade Inflation Seen Rising (Inside Higher Ed, 3/12/09)

This article reports the results of a study done by Stuart Rojstaczer, a retired Duke University professor:

Rojstaczer's findings will probably resonate with professors, many of whom regularly bemoan grade inflation and say that students are conditioned to expect good grades just for showing up, and that professors who refuse to go along get punished with harsh course evaluations. Many professors who are off the tenure track or who are pre-tenure report great fear of being punished by students (and then not rehired) if they gain a reputation for tough grading, and studies have found correlations between being an easy grader and earning good ratings at RateMyProfessors.com.…

Grade inflation—and deflation—in higher ed (DtB)

Students fail--and professor loses job (Inside Higher Ed)

Wikipedia on "grade inflation"

Wikipedia on "grades"

UCI Law school's B-day, tomorrow

In this morning’s OC Reg:

After tough birth, UCI School of Law opens Monday

What with UCI’s School of Law opening tomorrow, Gary Robbins reminds us of its “tough birth,” most notably the fubar of Chancellor Michael Drake’s choice of dean:

Chancellor Michael Drake raided Duke University in September 2007 for a high profile dean, constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky, who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. About a week later, Chemerinsky was fired in a flap over his liberal political views. An uproar followed, leading Drake to rehire Chemerinsky, a gregarious scholar who emphasizes the word you when asking people, “Who are you doing today?” [Who?]

“(Drake) received intense pressure over a short period of time from some very influential conservatives that convinced him that I would not succeed as dean and if he went forth with me … he would not succeed in some things he had worked hard to achieve,” says Chemerinsky, 56.

“In light of that, I understood why he did what he did.”

There were some tense moments when the brouhaha occurred. But Chemerinsky says, “I adore (Drake). I would not have accepted this job if I didn’t respect and admire him so much.”

(Last Monday, Drake gave a well-received keynote address for SOCCCD’s fall “opening session.” We at the SOCCCD have wondered if Trustee Tom Fuentes was among the “influential conservatives” who sought to block C’s hire. Fuentes did not attend Drake’s address.)

Robbins notes that the controversy has faded and, since then, things have gone well:

UCI crowed about the applicant pool in April, saying in a news release that the school “has chosen its inaugural class by accepting only 4 percent of its applicants, making it the most selective of any law school in the nation.”

According to Robbins, that claim “was wildly out of context.” Still, the school really has done well:

…[T]here is no disputing that UCI fared well in recruiting founding faculty. Brian Leiter’s influential Law School Reports blog says Irvine’s law faculty ranks among the top 10 nationally in scholarly productivity. The scholars include internationally known psychologist Elizabeth Loftus, an expert on eyewitness testimony.

(Loftus is most famous for her work on memory. She’s a major critic of the notion of “repressed” or “recovered” memories. See the Jane Doe case.)

Chemerinsky’s still making with the big talk. He made a promise:

“I sincerely believe that from the moment that we first get ranked (by U.S. News and World Report) we will be ranked in the top 20. Top 25, of course.”

Meanwhile, in the city of Orange:

Fancy dining in an O.C. college dorm? Look, and drool (Robbins, OC Reg)

Earlier, we told you that Chapman University in Orange had just opened a 200,000 square-foot residence hall that’s distinctive for its 51-foot high climbing wall, the tallest of any at a California college or university. We should also have mentioned that the $46 million dorm also has a dining hall that resembles a chic Vegas-style food court and offers up dorm food that’s far from the gut-bomb goulash you can still find at many schools. The upscale dining hall, in part, is the sort of amenity that schools like Chapman are using to try to attract top students and keep them living on campus. The hall, located in the dorm quad, near the football field, is open to the public. The building will be formally named next week.