A Short History of Grading Practices at Dalhousie University (1901-2021)
Saved in:
| Title: | A Short History of Grading Practices at Dalhousie University (1901-2021) |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Mackinnon, Sean P. (ORCID |
| Source: | Online Submission. 2022. |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 28 |
| Publication Date: | 2022 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Descriptive |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Foreign Countries, Universities, Grading, Educational History, College Students, Student Evaluation, Grades (Scholastic), Grade Point Average, Experimental Teaching |
| Geographic Terms: | Canada |
| Abstract: | Grading practices at Dalhousie University have changed considerably over the past 120 years. From 1901 until the early 1970s, Dalhousie used a variant of the British system. Initially, a grade of 65% or higher was required for distinction. In 1937, Dalhousie moved to a 2-category system (Distinction vs. Ordinary Pass) and in 1942 the distinction grade cutoff was lowered to 60%. By the late 1940s, "Second Division" was subdivided into Seconds and Thirds, and First Division required an 80% or higher. By the late 1960s, there were conversions between American letter grades (A, B, C, D), divisions, and percentage grades. Moreover, a 4pt "merit point" system served as a prototype to Grade Point Averages (GPA). Experimental teaching and grading practices were explored in the 1970s. Officially, percentage grades were abolished and replaced with an 11-point letter grade scale from A+ to F. Unofficially, most professors and departments used idiosyncratic percentage-to-letter conversion schemes, though they were eventually standardized within (but not across) departments. In the 1990s, the 4.3 GPA system was standardized university-wide largely because it was thought to give students a competitive advantage for federal scholarships. In the 2010s, Dalhousie standardized percentage conversion schemes across all departments into one unified Common Grade Scale, partially due to GPA requirements for scholarships and graduate schools but also in response to student complaints about inconsistency. Overall, most grading changes in the past 120 years were implemented for the external communication value of grades rather than for their pedagogical value. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2022 |
| Accession Number: | ED620603 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Grading practices at Dalhousie University have changed considerably over the past 120 years. From 1901 until the early 1970s, Dalhousie used a variant of the British system. Initially, a grade of 65% or higher was required for distinction. In 1937, Dalhousie moved to a 2-category system (Distinction vs. Ordinary Pass) and in 1942 the distinction grade cutoff was lowered to 60%. By the late 1940s, "Second Division" was subdivided into Seconds and Thirds, and First Division required an 80% or higher. By the late 1960s, there were conversions between American letter grades (A, B, C, D), divisions, and percentage grades. Moreover, a 4pt "merit point" system served as a prototype to Grade Point Averages (GPA). Experimental teaching and grading practices were explored in the 1970s. Officially, percentage grades were abolished and replaced with an 11-point letter grade scale from A+ to F. Unofficially, most professors and departments used idiosyncratic percentage-to-letter conversion schemes, though they were eventually standardized within (but not across) departments. In the 1990s, the 4.3 GPA system was standardized university-wide largely because it was thought to give students a competitive advantage for federal scholarships. In the 2010s, Dalhousie standardized percentage conversion schemes across all departments into one unified Common Grade Scale, partially due to GPA requirements for scholarships and graduate schools but also in response to student complaints about inconsistency. Overall, most grading changes in the past 120 years were implemented for the external communication value of grades rather than for their pedagogical value. |
|---|
