2012/2013 – 02
PROPOSED MANDATE FOR UNIVERSITY COUNCIL
TITLE: Change to Grading System for Graduate Programs in the College of Arts and
Sciences
OBJECTIVE: To add the grades of B- and C+ to the grading system for Graduate
Programs in the College of Arts and Sciences.
REASONS FOR PROPOSED MANDATE:
1. The addition of the grades of B- and C+ to the grading system used for graduate
programs in the College of Arts and Sciences will allow faculty to provide more
precise assessments of student performance, reduce the temptation to inflate
grades to a B, and complement the GPA based dismissal/probation system
proposed in a separate mandate (if that mandate is approved).
RECOMMENDED FOR STUDY BY WHICH BODY?
__X__ Faculty Senate:
Academic Policies and Procedures Committee
_____ Faculty Senate:
Faculty Policies and Procedures Committee
_____ College Council:
College of Arts and Sciences
_____ College Council:
Haub School of Business
_____ Standing Committee on Student Affairs, Full-time Undergraduate
_____ Standing Committee on Student Affairs, Part-time Undergraduate/Graduate
_____ Administrative/Staff Council
Signature: Sabrina DeTurk, Associate Dean, Graduate Arts & Sciences Date: 10/3/12
Please forward to the Provost who serves as Chair of the University Council, along with
complete documentation to substantiate the need for the proposed mandate.
EXPLANATION AND DOCUMENTATION
Graduate program directors in the College of Arts and Sciences have requested the
addition of the grades of B- and C+ to the grading scale in order to provide a more
precise system for describing levels of student achievement in graduate courses. With the
addition of these grades, the graduate grading system in the College of Arts and Sciences
would read as follows:
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
F
(4.0)
(3.7)
(3.3)
(3.0)
(2.7) - new
(2.3) - new
(2.0)
(0.0)
In the current system, there is room for nuanced assessment of the quality of student work
at the upper end of the grading scale, where grades of A, A-, B+, and B are all available,
but not at the lower end; if a student is not deemed to have completed B level work, the
instructor’s next option is to assign a grade of C. This system does not allow for
recognition of the varying degrees of quality that may exist in work below the B level. A
document from the Faculty Senate at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, which adopted a
plus/minus grading system in 2004, succinctly captures this point:
“… the difference between what is now a B and a C (1 grade point) may in fact be as
small as 0.33 (B- vs. C+) or as large as 1.66 (B+ vs. C-). Or, to put it in another way: The
difference between the lowest B and the highest C in a class now looks much bigger than
it really is.” [Note that the grading scale for SJU graduate courses already includes a B+
grade, however the general principle still applies.]
(http://virtual2.yosemite.cc.ca.us/mjcinstruction/PlusMinusGrading/RensselaerPoly.htm)
From the student perspective, the addition of the B- and C+ grades provides greater
opportunity for students to continue to improve their final grade right up until the end of
the course. Under the current system, a student who approaches the final assignment
with a C average may not be reasonably able to achieve a grade on that one assignment
that would move them up to a B. The student may therefore put forward only the
minimum effort required to maintain their C average. However, they might reasonably
achieve a grade that could push their final average to a C+ or B- which should provide
incentive to put forth maximum effort on that final assignment.
While quantitative data does not exist to prove this assertion, it is valuable to consider the
potentially positive effect the addition of B- and C+ grades may have on reducing grade
inflation. Under the current system, instructors may lean toward giving a borderline
student the higher grade, perhaps in order to avoid a grade dispute or because the
instructor feels, for example, that the student performed at B- level and the B is the
closest grade available. The addition of the B- and C+ grades may encourage faculty to
assign students the specific grade that most closely aligns with their level of academic
performance.
A mandate has also been submitted on behalf of the graduate directors in the College of
Arts and Sciences recommending that the academic dismissal and probation policy for
graduate students in the College of Arts and Sciences be changed to a GPA based system.
Should that mandate pass, the new academic probation and dismissal policy is intended to
complement this change in grading policy. With the addition of B- and C+ grades it is to
be expected that more students would fall below the 3.0 GPA required to maintain good
academic standing. However, the majority of those students would likely have GPAs in
the range of 2.3 to 2.9, thus placing them on probation. For students doing B- or C+ level
work, that is likely to be a more accurate assessment of their academic standing and
offers greater opportunity to counsel probationary students so that they can become more
successful in their programs.
Should the mandate regarding the addition of B- and C+ grades pass, but the mandate on
the academic probation and dismissal policy fail to pass, an adjustment would have to be
made to the current academic dismissal policy to reflect the addition of the +/- grades.
It is not recommended that other policies contingent on achieving or maintaining certain
grades be adjusted in light of this change. For example, transfer credit may be received
only for courses in which a student has received a minimum grade of B (not B-).
It is recommended that the change in grading scale be implemented in the first term
following the passage of this mandate (or as soon as feasible, pending confirmation from
the registrar’s office). It is further recommended that a notation be placed on student
transcripts noting when the change took effect.
APPENDIX A
Examples of grading systems at other Jesuit and local institutions – note that grades such
as I, W, FA, etc. are not included here and no changes are recommended to SJU’s current
system for grades other than A through F.
University of
Scranton
A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, F
Loyola Maryland
A, B, C, F with the stipulation the “Additional suffixes of (+) and
(-) may be attached to passing grades to more sharply define the
academic achievement of a student. In calculating a student's
quality point average (QPA) on a per credit basis, A = 4.000; A- =
3.670; B+ = 3.330; B = 3.000; B- = 2.670; C+ = 2.330; C = 2.000;
and F = 0.000.”
Loyola Chicago
A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, D+, D, F
Fairfield University
A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, F
Creighton
University
A, B, C, F
Temple University
A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, D+, D, D-, F
Villanova
University
A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, F
Drexel University
A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, D+, D, F
La Salle University
A, A-, B+, B, B-, C, F
APPENDIX B
Sample of schools which have recently adopted a plus/minus grading system at the
graduate and/or undergraduate level (note that these schools were moving from a
previous system with no plus/minus grades assigned at all). This selection is for
illustrative purposes only and not intended to represent any particular comparison group.
Several of the web sites indicated include explanations for the decision to switch systems.
University of Maryland (2012)
http://www.testudo.umd.edu/plusminusimplementation.html
University of Mississippi (2011)
http://www.olemiss.edu/info/grading.html
Kutztown University (2011)
http://www.kutztown.edu/registrar/Plus-minus.pdf
University of Texas at San Antonio (2011)
http://www.paisano-online.com/news/utsa-to-switch-to-plus-minus-grading-system-infall-2011-1.1777437
University of Missouri (2011)
http://gradschool.missouri.edu/policies/progress/grading/
University of Texas at Austin (2009)
http://www.utexas.edu/cola/student-affairs/news/1876
APPENDIX C
The following study was supported by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars
and Admissions Officers and specifically examines changes in graduate grading scales.
Malone, B.G., J.S. Nelson, and C.Van Nelson. 2002. A Study of the Effect of the
Implementation of the Plus/Minus Grading System on Graduate Student Grades. College
and University. 77(3): 11-21.