Proposal to Move to a Plus/Minus Grading System
After substantial research and discussion, beginning in
fall 2005, the Admissions and Retention Policy Committee proposes that the
university adopt the following grading system:
|
Letter grade |
Quality points |
|
|
|
|
A |
4.0 |
|
A- |
3.7 |
|
B+ |
3.3 |
|
B |
3.0 |
|
B- |
2.7 |
|
C+ |
2.3 |
|
C |
2.0 |
|
C- |
1.7 |
|
D+ |
1.3 |
|
D |
1.0 |
|
D- |
0.7 |
|
F |
0 |
The change will bring the university’s grading system more
in-line with our peer institutions, two-thirds of which currently use a
plus/minus grading system (10 of 15 schools—See Appendix). It’s also important
to note that 10 of the 16 UNC institutions use a plus/minus system. Two of
these institutions, NC State and UNC Greensboro, include an “A+” in their scales.
Despite the existence of the A+, both institutions caps their cumulative GPA at
4.0. (See below for more on the A+ issue).
Furthermore, as pointed out in a recent faculty senate
committee document at Seton Hall University, “Plus/Minus grading is the
standard in American academia, . . . Translating between different
systems often causes confusion and could put our students at a disadvantage in
their applications to graduate and professional schools.”
Perhaps more importantly, the proposed change includes more
grading steps and thus is a more precise indication of student achievement.
Unlike the current system in which minor differences in performance can
translate into substantial letter grade differences, the proposed system allows
for minor differences in performance to result in minor differences in letter grades.
Additionally, more precise indications of student
achievement will more fairly reward higher-achieving students. In the current
system, students who perform in the low-B range receive the same number of
quality points as students who perform in the high-B range, a situation that disadvantages
students whose work is clearly stronger than the work of some other students
who, nonetheless, receive the same grade.
Another potential benefit of the proposed system is an
increased ability for all work in a given semester to affect student
grades. Under the current system, some students find themselves, late in the
semester, firmly placed in the middle of a letter grade range, so that
performance on a final exam/project is not likely to have any effect on the
final course grade. Under the proposed system, these students will have a
reason to continue to prepare for final exams and projects in the hope of
making small improvements in their course grades. This situation will enhance
the learning environment, particularly toward the end of the semester.
At the same time, the change should not have dramatic
effects on overall student GPAs. Numerous schools have conducted research into
the effects of switching from a grading system without pluses and minuses to a system
that incorporates these gradations. According to a faculty committee that
conducted such research recently at RPI in response to concerns raised about a
switch there to a plus/minus scare,
the general answer to this concern is a clear no. A number of studies at other universities as well as our own data indicate that the overall impact on GPAs will be small. The faculty on the Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee [at RPI] regraded courses they had taught recently on the basis of the +/- system, and the data showed that in almost all courses the average of grades changed by at most a few one-hundreds of a point, and not necessarily in the same direction.
Additionally,
a plus/minus scale will reduce the impact of grading inaccuracy. Researchers at
The [results] illustrates that, under the current system, the . . . largest errors occur for students close to the cutoff between letter grades, as expected. Students who should have earned an 81 (and therefore a B) are assigned a C almost half the time under the current system. Similarly, students who should have earned a 79 and a C are assigned a B almost half the time. For borderline students, the reported grade is wrong almost half the time. When the wrong grade is assigned, the awarded grade is in error by a full grade point.
While instructors will be just as inaccurate in their assessment of students under the proposed system, the effects of their errors on student grade points are much smaller. A student who should have earned an 81 and therefore a B- may instead receive a C+ or B; however, these grades carry only small differences (0.333) in grade points assigned from the proper grade of B-.
Thus, reported grades will be more accurate reflections of student performance under the proposed plus/minus system, even if faculty can grade with only an accuracy of one letter grade. Rounding inaccurate grades to the nearest letter grade increases inaccuracy.
It
should be noted that one specific group of students may see a slightly negative
impact as a result of this new system: Students with a straight-A, 4.0 GPA under
the present system. With the proposed +/- system, the highest possible grade
will be an A, and what were A’s previously will become A’s and A-‘s; thus, a 4.0
average will be harder to maintain. For students who maintain a GPA between 3.7
and 4.0, however, the proposed system will better reflect their academic
excellence. As explained in a proposal
to move to a plus/minus system at
For A-level students, a greater competitive edge in the grad school admission process: a 4.0 GPA from a school with the A- (3.7) grade looks better than a 4.0 GPA from a school without the A- grade, since the latter 4.0 may consist entirely of A-’s, whereas the former 4.0 is straight A’s.
Some may wonder why the committee has chosen to omit an A+ option,
valued at 4.3 quality points, to counteract this slightly negative effect. We
determined that it is important to retain 4.0 as the highest possible GPA
because 4.0 is by far the most common upper-limit on quality-point scales (for
example, none of our 10 peer institutions using a plus/minus system use an
“A+”). Including an “A+” with more than
4.0 quality points could result in a disadvantage to all of ECU students
because such a move might lead to graduate schools and/or employers
“translating” all students’ GPAs to a 4.0 scale (in other words, dividing students’
cumulative GPAs by 4.3), an action that would lower overall GPAs by about eight
percent. Here is a chart indicating the effect such a translation might have on
students GPAs when those students apply for graduate or professional school:
|
Cumulative GPA |
Cumulative GPA resulting from translation (multiplied by
.93) |
|
4.0 |
3.72 |
|
3.7 |
3.44 |
|
3.5 |
3.25 |
|
3.0 |
2.79 |
|
2.7 |
2.51 |
|
2.5 |
2.32 |
|
2.0 |
1.86 |
|
1.7 |
1.58 |
|
1.5 |
1.39 |
|
1.0 |
0.93 |
As with any non-standard grading scale, there is a risk of
misinterpretation on the part of institutions and employers reviewing
transcripts. The committee felt that the risk of GPA damage that might be done
to all ECU students by adding a 4.3 option to the grading scale was too great
at this time. If the kind of arrangement currently in place at NC State and UNC
Greensboro (which just added the A+ option in Fall 2006) becomes more widely
used, this option might be reconsidered at a later date.
http://www2.acs.ncsu.edu/UPA/otherdata/GRADANAL.HTM
http://www.wfu.edu./~matthews/plus_minus/plus_minus.html
Faculty Senate Special Committee (Seaton
Hall) on the Introduction of Minus Grades (2004) http://virtual2.yosemite.cc.ca.us/mjcinstruction/PlusMinusGrading/Seaton%20Hall%20recommendation.doc
Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute’s Proposal for a +/- Grading System (2004)
http://virtual2.yosemite.cc.ca.us/mjcinstruction/PlusMinusGrading/RensselaerPoly.htm
http://www.wku.edu/Dept/Org/FS/Grading%20System%20Motion%202003/TrumanStateReport.pdf
Appendix: Grade Point Scales at Peer Institutions
|
|||
|
|
A |
|
Outstanding competence |
|
4 |
|
B |
|
Above satisfactory competence |
|
3 |
|
C |
|
Satisfactory level of competence |
|
2 |
|
D |
|
Marginally satisfactory competence |
|
1 |
|
F |
|
Unsatisfactory level of competence |
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio University-Main campus
|
Letter |
Numerical Equivalent |
Description |
|
A |
4.0 |
Excellent |
|
A- |
3.67 |
Excellent |
|
B+ |
3.33 |
Good |
|
B |
3.00 |
Good |
|
B- |
2.67 |
Good |
|
C+ |
2.33 |
Acceptable |
|
C |
2.00 |
Acceptable |
|
C- |
1.67 |
Acceptable |
|
D+ |
1.33 |
Passing but Minimally Acceptable |
|
D |
1.00 |
Passing but Minimally Acceptable |
|
D- |
0.67 |
Passing but Minimally Acceptable |
|
F |
0.00 |
Failing |
Old Dominion
Grade Points Undergraduate Graduate
A 4.00
A- 3.70
B+ 3.30 Good
B 3.00 Good
B- 2.70 Good
C+ 2.30 Satisfactory
C 2.00 Satisfactory
C- 1.70 Passing
D+ 1.30 Passing
D 1.00 Passing
D- 0.70 Passing
F 0.00 Failing
Grade Points. The grades of A, B, C, and D carry with them grade points of 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively, for each semester hour of credit value of the course in which the grade is received. All other grades have no grade points assigned them.
U of
Letter Grade |
Description |
Points perSemester Hour |
A A- B+ BB-C+CC-D+DD-F |
The highest grade Work of distinction Average work Passing, but unsatisfactoryFailure |
4.03.73.33.02.72.32.01.71.31.00.70 |
U of Wisconsin
|
Grade |
(Points per credit) |
|
A |
(4.000) Excellent |
|
A- |
(3.670) |
|
B+ |
(3.330) |
|
B |
(3.000) Good |
|
B- |
(2.670) |
|
C+ |
(2.330) |
|
C |
(2.000) Fair |
|
C- |
(1.670) |
|
D+ |
(1.330) |
|
D |
(1.000) Poor |
|
D- |
(0.670) |
|
F |
(0.000) Fail |
|
Grade |
|
Significance |
|
|
|
A |
|
Outstanding, Exceptional, Extraordinary |
|
4.0 |
|
BA |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
B |
|
Very Good, |
|
3.0 |
|
CB |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
C |
|
Satisfactory, Acceptable, Adequate |
|
2.0 |
|
DC |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
D |
|
Poor |
|
1.0 |
|
E |
|
Failing |
|
0.0 |
|
X |
|
Failure (Unofficial Withdrawal) |
|
|
U of
“A’’ the highest grade, is given for work of exceptional
quality. Each credit earned with a grade of “A” carries
4.0 grade points.
“A-” carries 3.7 grade points for each credit earned.
“B+” carries 3.3 grade points for each credit earned.
“B’’ is awarded for better-than-average work. Each credit
earned with a grade of “B” carries 3.0 grade points.
“B-” carries 2.7 grade points for each credit earned.
“C+” carries 2.3 grade points for each credit earned.
“C’’ represents average work. Each credit earned with a
grade of “C” carries 2.0 grade points.
“C-” carries 1.7 grade points for each credit earned.
“D+” carries 1.3 grade points for each credit earned.
“D’’ carries 1.0 grade point for each credit earned.
“D-” carries 0.7 grade points for each credit earned.“D-”
is the lowest passing grade for which undergraduate
credit is allowed.
“F’’ represents failure. No credit or grade points are earned
with a grade of “F.” Failed courses count as credits
attempted
|
Letter Grade |
GPA |
|
|
A |
Marked Excellence |
4.00 |
|
B |
|
3.00 |
|
C |
Average |
2.00 |
|
D |
Passing but low |
1.00 |
|
F |
Failure |
0.00 |
A 4.0
B 3.0
C 2.0
D 1.0
F 0.0
SUNY
|
Grade |
Grade Points |
Interpretation |
|
A |
4.0 |
High Distinction |
|
A- |
3.67 |
High Distinction |
|
B+ |
3.33 |
|
|
B |
3.0 |
|
|
B- |
2.67 |
|
|
C+ |
2.33 |
Average |
|
C |
2.0 |
Average |
|
C- |
1.67 |
Average |
|
D+ |
1.33 |
Minimum Passing Grade |
|
D |
1.0 |
Minimum Passing Grade |
|
F |
0.0 |
Failure |
A 4.0
A- 3.7
B+ 3.3
B 3.0
B- 2.7
C+ 2.3
C 2.0
C- 1.7
D+ 1.3
D 1.0
D- 0.7
F 0.0
The grade points earned in any course carried with a passing grade (A, B+, B, C+, C, D+, D) are computed by multiplying the number of semester hour credits assigned to the course by a factor determined by the grade. For courses in which the grade of A was earned, the factor is 4; for B+, 3.5; for B, 3; for C+, 2.5; for C, 2; for D+, 1.5; for D, 1. The grade point average is determined by dividing the total number of semester grade points earned by the total number of semester hours attempted for credit (excepting hours carried on a Pass-Fail or audit basis). No grade points are assigned to the symbols F, S, U, WF, W, I, AUD, T, or NR.
Academic achievement is indicated by the following letter grades and points used in calculating GPAs.
|
A |
Excellent-4 points per credit hour |
|
B |
Good-3 points per credit hour |
|
C |
Satisfactory-2 points per credit hour |
|
D |
Poor-1 point per credit hour |
|
F |
Failed-0 points per credit hour |
|
X |
Student did not complete course or officially withdraw-0 points per credit hour |