On grading
On Tuesday, Faculty Senate will consider
two motions. One on changing the 4.5 system,
and a second on the passfail system at the
University. The first is important but the sec
ond is an essential step towards developing a
rational grading policy in the University.
The passfail proposal would extend
passfail option to sophomores; allow each
student to take a maximum of 24 hours pf
(currently the maximum is 12); and give col
leges the choice of making their group re
quirements open to passfail.
All three proposals are way over-due,
and actually they are mild. What magic divid
ing line separates the sophomore and junior
thus allowing the latter to take passfail but
denies pf to the former?
Since few students take more than 24
hours of electives, it doesn't do much good to
extend the limit further. That is, unless col
leges will allow any student to take his group
requirements passfail. The colleges shouldn t
have the choice to make requirements open
to pf; the student should have the choice to .
take group requirements passfail. The op
tion shouldn't lie with the college, but with
the student. In that case, the number of pf
hours should be unlimited.
Nevertheless, the pf proposals are a
progressive step, and they are the product of
both student and faculty input. The Faculty
Senate has the opportunity to make important
improvements in. the University grading sys
tem. The Daily Nebraskan hopes it will take
advantage of that opportunity.
When the University changed from the
4 0 grading system to a 4.5 system in the sec
ond semester of the 1967-68 academic year,
one reason was to bolster a dismal academic
rating among Big Eight schools. Although
this reason was not exactly emphasized, it
was a major consideration in the switch. The
plus system was designed to boost grade av
erages by adding a differentiation in grade
between high and low average within each
letter grade.
The bulk of University students, those
with averages between 2.0 and 3 5 despite
irregularities in grading have benefitted from
this system. But have the minority of students
above a 3.5 benefitted from it? How many
A- 's have you received? How many students
have grade averages above 4.0? The answer is
very few. It is the better student who is pen
alized" by the system. Not for his absolute
g p a., but because his average relative to 4.5
makes the g.p.a. appear much lower than it
actually is.
Tuesday, Faculty Senate will act on a
motion to eliminate the A grade thus rein
stating the 4.0 maximum but retaining D.C,
and B plusses. Hopefully, the motion will carry.
As long as the University persists in playing
the numbers game, it at least shouldn't pen
alize those who play the game best.
Jim Pedersen
DAILY NEBRASKAN
Mmbr of Intvrtollvqltt Prota, NHml tducaNanal
tna UnlvrlY of NobraHia1 anlnltratlan. family an
nt aevtrnmont.
Addroui Daily Nebraska
VI uhraikl Lin kin
Unlvorlty of Nebraska
'THANK HEAVEN THERE J NO WAY LEFT $S UP.
Times are Changing?
by DON STENBERG
Next Tuesday the Faculty Senate will
vote on two proposals submitted to it
by the Faculty Senate Grading Com
mittee a change in the grading system
and an expansion of the Pass-Fail
privilege.
The results of these votes are Impor
tant for several reasons.' This will be
the first time that a joint student-faculty
committee has made a proposal to the
Faculty Senate in an area directly
related to academic matters. This
particular committee was In fact
established by the Faculty Senate a few
years ago when a change In the grading
system made independent of any student
input aroused concern among many of
the students and faculty.
The results of the vote should at least
to some degree help to establish whether
the creation of this committee and others
like it are merely a form of tokenism
or whether the faculty feels that students
can be a positive force in improving
the academic environment.
BOTH PROPOSALS are revisions of
ASUN Education Committee proposals.
These revisions were made by the
faculty members of the Grading Com
mittee in light of their own experiences
and In consideration of suggestions by
their colleagues.
The faculty members on the com
mittee came from several different col
leges and represented many varied In
terests yet the final drafts of both
proposals gained the unanimous support
THE1 DAILY NEBRASKAN
of the committee as well as the en
dorsement of the Arts and Sciences Ad
visory Board, the Engineering Exec
Board, the Agricultural Advisory Board,
the Business Administration Advisory
Board, the Teachers College Advisory
Board, the Arts and Sciences Curriculum
Committee and the ASUN Education
Committee.
THE ONLY major criticism of either
proposal that has not been ironed out
is that "in recent gears there has been
overmuch tinkering with grading pro
cedures." Each and every faculty
member has the right to vote against
these proposals for this reason, or any
other.
However, it seems that most college
faculty members would be quite out
of character if they voted these pro
posals down on the basis that they con
stitute "overmuch tinkering."
For are not these same faculty
members those who advocate extension
of knowledge through research and ex
perimentation, and who seek to use their
. knowledge to improve our society? And
are these proposals not a calculated
ejfort to improve existing conditions?
LAYING ALL other considerations
aside, the ASUN Education Committee
feels that these proposals should be
passed because they offer constructive
improvement In the area of grading and
evaluation that should be of benefit tc
both the faculty and students, llopcfullj
the Senate will share this view.
FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1970
Lincoln, Nobratfta
PGE 4
