Blogs >> Education & Books >>
Replacing marks with grade - will it really add value in the long run?
While going through my previous post about how effective educational reforms are and whether scrapping of board exams, though well intentioned, will work, another part of the proposal came to mind - the one about replacing the marks system with grading system.
Whenever such a proposal has been put forward I have always felt that somehow, such a step will ultimately lower standards. The proponents of this theory have cited various reasons including some like - "those with lower marks are humiliated" or that "students and parents fight over every quarter mark as it effects rank" or "students get swollen headed" or "this is the system followed internationally" etc.
None of these statements are entirely wrong. Nor are they entirely correct.
I remember my father recounting a story from his childhood about the time his school started rewarding top ranking students at the end of the year. He himself had never bothered to put in enough effort to be the topper though he had been capable of it. Seeing his elder brother - who had always made the effort and topped - get the reward inspired him to reach for that goal. He succeeded.
Such a simple story and yet what profound message it holds.
The way I interpret it is like this :
We all have potential - each different from the other. People, with few exceptions, crave recognition and satisfaction. For many, satisfaction comes from recognition.
As adults we learn to distinguish between the lucrative and the satisfying and pursue the course necessary to achieve one or both. But as children or students, this need for recognition, and the satisfaction that comes as a result of it, are as important if not more important than it is for adults.
School examinations are the simplest and most abundant source for achievement. With a grade system, a person scoring 80% and another scoring 95% are on par. Both get the 'A' grade. Since they both have achieved the highest grade possible, there is no longer any incentive left to try and better oneself. Even if the 80%er has the potential to be better he/she does not have the incentive to reach for that potential - more effort will not add anything to his grades, you see?. Down the line the same principal applies to the other grades. If say grade 'B' comes from a score between 60% and 79% then the 79%er might make the effort to climb to 80 but the 60%er does not have the incentive to do better. He most probably will feel that since he can not improve his grade to 'A' however much he tries then there is no point in putting in more effort.
This, I think is what will lead to mediocrity in the long run. When effort does not bring tangible results then it leads, not to more effort, but to apathy.
The proponents of the grade system do have a point when they say that the marks system has created an unhealthy competition among students and even more so among their parents. But the fault here lies not in the system but in the components - the biggest culprits being the parents.
But there again, there is a reason why such an unhealthy hunger for that last 1/4 mark has gripped one and all. And the reason is that often that last 1/4 mark could mean the difference between getting admission into a school/PU college of choice or having to make do with second best. A very important point but outside the purpose of this post.
Getting back to the main topic, is it really wise to replace the marks system with the grade system? Why are we thinking about it at all? Because it is the system being followed in the 'developed countries'?
The more I think on these lines, the more convinced I get that this, more than anything else is the reason for this move. The questions that comes to mind then are:
- how come Indians who have studied with these very same conditions do so well in these developed countries if our system was so faulty?
- Would they be so well respected if they did not have the quality in them to strive to be ever better?
- Would this special quality survive an incentive eroding Grade System?
- Won't the loss of this quality - an assured result when extra effort does not bring extra recognition - create and promote mediocrity rather than excellence?
These questions make it clear that a lot more thought is needed before we scrap a system we are familiar with. Sure, there are shortcomings in the system - the least not being the mindset it has created in the students and parents. The proposed replacement has shortcomings too. So weighing the benefits and shortcomings is the step that needs to be taken now. Only when we are sure that the shortcomings of the new do not outweigh the shortcomings of the old and will not erode its benefits will it be time to change the system.
Whenever such a proposal has been put forward I have always felt that somehow, such a step will ultimately lower standards. The proponents of this theory have cited various reasons including some like - "those with lower marks are humiliated" or that "students and parents fight over every quarter mark as it effects rank" or "students get swollen headed" or "this is the system followed internationally" etc.
None of these statements are entirely wrong. Nor are they entirely correct.
I remember my father recounting a story from his childhood about the time his school started rewarding top ranking students at the end of the year. He himself had never bothered to put in enough effort to be the topper though he had been capable of it. Seeing his elder brother - who had always made the effort and topped - get the reward inspired him to reach for that goal. He succeeded.
Such a simple story and yet what profound message it holds.
The way I interpret it is like this :
We all have potential - each different from the other. People, with few exceptions, crave recognition and satisfaction. For many, satisfaction comes from recognition.
As adults we learn to distinguish between the lucrative and the satisfying and pursue the course necessary to achieve one or both. But as children or students, this need for recognition, and the satisfaction that comes as a result of it, are as important if not more important than it is for adults.
School examinations are the simplest and most abundant source for achievement. With a grade system, a person scoring 80% and another scoring 95% are on par. Both get the 'A' grade. Since they both have achieved the highest grade possible, there is no longer any incentive left to try and better oneself. Even if the 80%er has the potential to be better he/she does not have the incentive to reach for that potential - more effort will not add anything to his grades, you see?. Down the line the same principal applies to the other grades. If say grade 'B' comes from a score between 60% and 79% then the 79%er might make the effort to climb to 80 but the 60%er does not have the incentive to do better. He most probably will feel that since he can not improve his grade to 'A' however much he tries then there is no point in putting in more effort.
This, I think is what will lead to mediocrity in the long run. When effort does not bring tangible results then it leads, not to more effort, but to apathy.
The proponents of the grade system do have a point when they say that the marks system has created an unhealthy competition among students and even more so among their parents. But the fault here lies not in the system but in the components - the biggest culprits being the parents.
But there again, there is a reason why such an unhealthy hunger for that last 1/4 mark has gripped one and all. And the reason is that often that last 1/4 mark could mean the difference between getting admission into a school/PU college of choice or having to make do with second best. A very important point but outside the purpose of this post.
Getting back to the main topic, is it really wise to replace the marks system with the grade system? Why are we thinking about it at all? Because it is the system being followed in the 'developed countries'?
The more I think on these lines, the more convinced I get that this, more than anything else is the reason for this move. The questions that comes to mind then are:
- how come Indians who have studied with these very same conditions do so well in these developed countries if our system was so faulty?
- Would they be so well respected if they did not have the quality in them to strive to be ever better?
- Would this special quality survive an incentive eroding Grade System?
- Won't the loss of this quality - an assured result when extra effort does not bring extra recognition - create and promote mediocrity rather than excellence?
These questions make it clear that a lot more thought is needed before we scrap a system we are familiar with. Sure, there are shortcomings in the system - the least not being the mindset it has created in the students and parents. The proposed replacement has shortcomings too. So weighing the benefits and shortcomings is the step that needs to be taken now. Only when we are sure that the shortcomings of the new do not outweigh the shortcomings of the old and will not erode its benefits will it be time to change the system.
|
|
