Forced grade distribution isn't good

In response to Walter E. Williams' column titled, "Grade inflation is academic dishonesty, and it's hurting our future" (Oct. 14), I completely agree that lax standards in education are a problem about which we should all be concerned. He cites much evidence for creeping grade inflation over the past century and does a good job of discussing some of the negative implications that grade inflation can have on the students, institutions of education and society as a whole. However, I do think there is an important point he is missing in his analysis of the issue.

Williams failed to acknowledge that there have been significant strides made over the past 50-plus years in the research on effective teaching and adult learning. As a result, there has been an ongoing fundamental pedagogical shift away from the traditional "teaching content" lecture/student regurgitation model of education toward a more "facilitate discovery" engaged student-centered learning model of education. In the traditional model, the forced grade distribution of students (or grading on the curve) that he argues for to avoid grade inflation makes a lot of sense. However, such an approach is not inherently superior and can fall prey to contrast errors (common in the comparative performance assessment approach), where potentially excellent students could receive low grades simply due to the forced distribution, or where "top performers" could be over-rewarded for mediocre performance due to the relative ineptitude of the rest of the class.

Furthermore, in the engaged student-centered learning model, research has consistently shown that forced grade distribution (or a type of "reward for performance" system) can actually work to de-incentivize student intrinsic motivation for learning and can foster unhealthy levels of classroom competition (such as classroom gamesmanship and manipulation for the grade) that can quash healthy collaborative learning activities that can help students to have a more long-lasting and meaningful learning experience.

There is no question that educators need to hold students to the highest standards when developing learning objectives and assessing student performance. Providing such thorough and objective feedback on student performance is necessary in facilitating individual student development and in adequately training the next generation of leaders. However, this necessity for high standards does not inevitably translate into an arbitrary forced distribution of student grades.

Jonathan H. Westover is an assistant professor of business at Utah Valley University.