The assignment of letter grades is one of the most difficult things that UOP instructors encounter. Most traditional educational institutions are encumbered by some sort of "A" through "F" grading system. Unfortunately, such systems usually do much more to inhibit genuine learning than they do to stimulate it.

In fact, the very concept of such grading perpetuates failure. It is derived from a system of instructional delivery that is based on reading and lectures as the primary sources of information. Courses are structured into rigid 50 minute periods and students are processed like pieces of meat stamped with different grades. The idea is that large numbers of students are given a series of reading assignments and "exposed" to the insights of an instructor after which they are tested to determine how much of what they have read and heard they are able to regurgitate. Normative statistical concepts associated with grading have established the expectation that a specific percentage of students taking any given test will score in the "F" range, a specific percentage will score in the "D" range, a specific percentage will score in the "C" range, and specific percentage will score in the "B" range, and a specific percentage will score in the "A" range.

It is sometimes suggested that students have a "right to fail" and that one of the functions of an instructor is to sort out those students who can "hack it" from those who cannot. Back when there were lots of jobs that didn’t really require an education, students who failed could simply go to work. That is not the situation in our contemporary, high technological world. As we are learning the hard way, the only avenues open to students who fail are welfare and crime.

UOP realizes that higher education can no longer afford to simply herd students into educational holding pens, throw in a little mush and hope for the best. The University has devised core-competency based courses that prepare working adults to learn the specific things that they need to be able to do in order to earn a living and to serve as a responsible member of society.

The core competencies are as follows:

• Written Communication Skills
• Oral Presentation Skills
• Collaborative Skill
• Quantitative Analysis Skill
• Interpersonal Skills
• Critical Thinking Skills
• Computer/Software Applications

The bell curve does not ring true. In our programs, we do not use the bell curve to distinguish students from their peers, with the best receiving A’s and the average receiving C’s. Grades issued by UOP, justly, measure how well students met course standards and their own potential.

At the Nevada Campus, we expect our students to do well. Plus, our grading philosophies contrast with the traditional idea of using grades to rank students from best to worst.

If, for whatever reason, everybody in your class is doing very good or excellent work, everyone in your class can get A’s and B’s. The reason everybody can receive the same grade is that the instructors look at how well students master the materials they are presented in our accelerated programs. To do otherwise and grade students in relation to each other could mean that a student who did better than everyone else would get an A even if the student did not meet the standards.

UOP Faculty are expected to accept responsibility for making valid discriminations among levels of student performance evidenced by explicit grading criteria and grading variances.

A - Clearly stands out as excellent performance. Has unusually sharp insight into material and initiates thoughtful questions. Sees many sides of an issue. Articulates well and writes logically and clearly, and integrates ideas previously learned from this and other disciplines; anticipates next steps in the progression of ideas. Example: "A" work should be of such nature that it could be put on reserve for all students to review and emulate. The "A" student is, in fact, an example for others to follow.

B - This student grasps subject matters at a level considered to be good to very good. Is an active listener and participant in the workshop discussions. Speaks and writes well. Accomplishes more than the minimum requirements. Works in and out of the workshop is of high quality. Example: "B" work indicates a high quality performance and is given in recognition for solid work; a "B" should be considered a high grade.

F- Quality and quantity of work in and out of the workshop is unacceptable. Example: "F" work does not qualify the student to progress to a more advanced level of course work.

Note: Graduate students are expected to do above average work and must maintain a "B" average to earn their degrees.

The Nevada Campus has provided faculty with substantial tools to more effectively evaluate student’s competencies and for students to have frequent, specific feedback about their proficiency of mastering knowledge.

Faculty modules encourage faculty to use as many different indicators of student performance as practical. Faculty Development workshops, Faculty Orientations and Senior Faculty. Updates, admonish Faculty to clearly explain their grading system to students, and to administer their grading consistently and objectively. Do not make up the grading system as you go along. Students have a right to know exactly what they need to do earn an "A" or "B".

Absolute grading instead of grading on a curve has been adapted by the University and alternative forms of assessment are encouraged. The bell curve grading system by its very nature fosters competition, restricts collaboration, and leads to anxiety. Within this system, if one student helps another, then he/she alters the bell curve and lowers his/her own grade. Absolute grading eliminates this threat. Higher standards are set in that every UOP student who prepares well can receive a top grade.

Martinez, P. "Bell Curve No Longer Rings True." The Arizona Daily Star. (September 7, 1998)

Pendleton, R. Readings for Vocational Instructors. (McGraw Hill, 1993)