Of the 181 members of the faculty who responded to a 2003 poll conducted by the Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning, 82 percent were in favor of adding pluses and minuses to the University's grading system. Though there has been no new survey, it is clear that, three years later, many faculty members still support pluses and minuses.
Several professors interviewed by The Herald who support pluses and minuses offered disparate reasons for their positions.
The change in the grading proposal has been met with opposition from undergraduates, with 70 percent of students expressing disapproval in a Herald poll released in February. Some students have argued that a changed grading system would fundamentally alter the spirit of the New Curriculum.
Some professors agree that pluses and minuses would decrease collaboration within the student body and lead to a more competitive environment, which will harm education in the long run. Others, such as Luther Spoehr, lecturer in education and vice chair of the College Curriculum Council, assert that changing the grading system would not alter Brown's academic atmosphere.
"The grading system as a whole provides lots of opportunities for Brown students to invest themselves, take risks and try new things," he said. "I have no problem with that at all."
He added that late deadlines for choosing to take a course S/NC, the option to drop a course up to the day of the final exam, the fact that students can take any course they want S/NC and the fact that no grades below a C appear on transcripts all foster risk-taking.
Dean of the Faculty Rajiv Vohra P'07, a professor of economics, agreed that the addition of pluses and minuses has no bearing on the freedom the S/NC option offers to students.
"I think the faculty would be loathe to impose a system that might restrict students from taking courses that challenged them," he said.
Patricia Sobral, lecturer in Portuguese and Brazilian studies, also believes that the addition of pluses and minuses to the grading system is not as big of an issue as students seem to think it is.
"If they were taking S/NC away altogether, it would be a different thing," she said.
Three letter grades give professors the opportunity to make only three broad distinctions when evaluating students. This system, Spoehr said, "almost mandates ambiguity."
Daniel Stupar, a technician in the Department of Visual Arts who currently teaches two sections of VA 10: "Studio Foundation," agreed that having three letter grades almost "forces the hand of favoritism." He said a student whose work is on the border between an A and a B but who has made a strong personal impression on the teacher is more likely to receive an A.
"It makes a lot of us feel very casual about the grading system at Brown," he said.
Currently an A on a transcript can mean anything between a B-plus and an A-plus. Spoehr argued that professors' practice of using pluses and minuses to grade assignments during the course of the semester is an indication that they are able to make finer distinctions when evaluating students' work.
"It is important throughout the semester to have a nuanced idea of where you're at in relation to the rest of the class," Sobral said. Like many faculty members, she already uses pluses and minuses to grade assignments even though they do not show up on the final transcript.
"An A-minus shows a student that they're doing well, but still need to keep up their work," she said, adding that rounding an A-minus up "would make them think they were in the A range entirely."
A majority of the faculty seemed to agree that greater precision in grading is a step in the right direction. Vohra cannot see any reason to prevent teachers from conveying the level of their students' work with greater clarity.
"In most cases instructors have better information about distinctions within their student group," he said.
Vohra added that though nearly 50 percent of grades at Brown are A's, he doubted the addition of pluses and minuses would counteract grade inflation significantly. Many in the faculty feel that grade inflation is out of hand at Brown, arguing that the introduction of B-pluses and A-minuses will reduce the pressure to award A's.
However, both Spoehr and Jonathan Waage, professor of biology and a CCC member, echoed Vohra's argument that the proposal will, at most, put only a small dent in grade inflation, as there is no evidence that the introduction of pluses and minuses would reduce the number of students receiving A's.
Spoehr objects to the way a three-letter grading system leaves room for dishonesty. If, for instance, a student is getting a B in one course, the current system allows him to let his work drop to a B-minus level and devote extra time to another B-level course to work toward an A.
During his 10 years at Brown, Spoehr has heard upperclassmen advise first-years on how to "game the system" in this manner.
"I think students here are very competitive about grades, but in an unacknowledged way," he said. "The new grading system would be not more competitive, but less manipulative."
Stupar said he has also found grades to be a highly motivating factor for students, even within the visual art department. Faculty within the department recommend taking classes S/NC to encourage students to focus on the creative aspect of the subject, but in the past students have not found an S grade to be sufficiently motivating and an unfair reward for the amount of effort they put into the class.
Waage said the faculty should think long and hard before changing the system for everyone just because a few students abuse it.
Sobral, for her part, expressed disappointment at the way the proposal has shown students to be excessively concerned with the outcome of the courses they take. "Students shouldn't see themselves in terms of grades," she said.
Spoehr has heard from both students who support the change and oppose it, and he emphasized his belief that students are entitled to their own opinion. He believes the largely negative student response to the plus/minus proposal arose partly as a result of the inaccurate impression that the CCC was attempting to bring about the change on the sly.
"We need to argue, talk, debate and discuss," he said. "In many ways this is Brown at its best."
Spoehr stressed that the power to bring the new grading proposal into effect lies not with the CCC, but with the faculty as a whole. He believes that although students should have their say in the matter, the final decision "belongs in the hands of people responsible for educating them over a long period of time."
He said his argument in support of the change is a distillation of conversations he has had with other members of the faculty.
"I have heard almost no opposition (from the faculty)," he said.
Stupar acknowledged that if he were a student, he might see the addition of pluses and minuses as a step backward as they make it more difficult for students to achieve stellar transcripts.
"Though (the plus/minus grading proposal) may seem retrograde," he said, "it will help students more than hurt them."
He added that in the event of pluses and minuses being introduced, the best thing professors can do for their students is to state clearly what their expectations are for a course. In this way, students can know exactly what their output should be in order to achieve the grade they want.
Waage is among the faculty who are not convinced by the arguments in support of the change in grading. He stressed that adding pluses and minuses to the current grading system would add a "false clarity" to it.
Waage said he knows at least two other faculty members who do not support the CCC's plus/minus grading proposal.
Even though faculty have guidelines as to how many students should be receiving what grades, the criteria for assigning those grades are left to individual professors' discretion, he said. Thus, A's awarded by two different professors can mean different things. Adding pluses and minuses would merely elaborate on a system that already leaves much room for subjectivity, rather than fundamentally altering its structure.
"The grading system is not always very accurate, and making it seem more accurate than it is makes me uncomfortable," Waage said.
According to Waage, pluses and minuses are not the kind of clarity the University ought to be striving for. Wishing to elaborate on his statement in the March 2 forum on grading that "our current system sucks (and) adding pluses and minuses is not going to make it less sucky," he expressed a belief that letter grades are not rich in information and that more nuanced divisions between them will not increase the information they provide. Ideally, he would like to see a de-emphasizing of grades on transcripts.
"I've seen (students who got B's) a couple of semesters later, and they're much better at understanding the use of the material than students I gave A's," he said, adding that a number of factors during the course of the semester and exams can come into play to prevent students from receiving grades that accurately reflect their ability.
While he understands the value and need for grades, Waage said, he favors letters of recommendation, evaluations and portfolios as more effective ways in which to indicate a student's level of academic accomplishment.
