Despite allegations of rampant grade inflation at colleges, the C is alive and well,
ALSO SEE: Undergraduate Grade-Point Averages, 1999-2000
|
according to a report released late last month by the U.S. Education Department.
In a study profiling the approximately 16.5 million undergraduates enrolled on American campuses during the 1999-2000 academic year, researchers found that while 14.5 percent of the students had received mostly A’s, more than a third had received grades mostly of C or below, on the basis of grade-point averages. And 48.9 percent of African-American undergraduates received the latter grades -- a larger percentage than any other ethnic group.
The report, “Profile of Undergraduates in U.S. Postsecondary Education Institutions: 1999-2000,” is an analysis by the Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics. It is based on data from the 1999-2000 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, a demographic survey conducted by the department’s Office of Educational Research and Improvement. For the survey, which focuses on how students and their families pay for college, institutions reported grade data based on student transcripts. In cases where institutional data were not available, student-reported grade-point averages were used.
Information on grades is only part of the new report, which also examines race, gender, and other demographic data; where undergraduates enroll and what they study; and risk factors that can prevent students from completing their studies and earning degrees.
The grade analysis “debunks all the furor over grade inflation,” said Debra Humphreys, a spokeswoman for the Association of American Colleges and Universities.
But the proportion of African-American students receiving C’s and D’s is not the most pressing problem, she added. “The real issue isn’t whether there’s a disparity between racial groups. The big disparity that we should be concerned about is that the privileged are incredibly prepared to go to college.”
Analyzing the Data
Bradford P. Wilson, executive director of the National Association of Scholars, said he was “perplexed” by the grade data presented in the report. “This seems to paint a very different picture than that of all the other studies of which I’m aware,” he said. Although he declined to comment on the details of the new report without knowledge of the researchers’ methodology, he said a different prognosis could be found in a report published this year by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, which describes grade inflation as a major problem in academe, especially at Ivy League institutions.
The academy’s report, which Mr. Wilson regards as more accurate, includes data from several previous grade-inflation studies and analyses of current grading approaches in academe, and it proposes possible ways to minimize grade inflation.
“The most obvious thing that it suggests is that African-Americans are coming to colleges and universities with less preparation for college-level work than other groups,” said Mr. Wilson, whose group favors a traditional curriculum and opposes racial preferences. “But I wouldn’t blame it on affirmative action, because most of the institutions [included in the report] are not selective institutions.”
But Shelby Steele, a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace who is a vocal critic of affirmative action, blamed the policy as part of the problem. “Affirmative action puts people in situations where they’re less qualified than others,” he said. “That’s a fact. I think this no doubt reflects that as well.”
The deeper problem is that “academic rigor is not valued or nurtured enough in black families from infancy on up,” he said. “They have not realized the extreme importance of intellectual academic development.”
Harvey C. Mansfield, a Harvard University professor of government who has made a point of criticizing grade inflation, said he was surprised by the new report’s finding that such a high proportion of students had received low grades. “It reflects a discrepancy between the most prestigious universities and the rest,” he said. “You see more grade inflation at the more prestigious institutions.”
But some grade inflation is evident in the report nonetheless, he argued. “It is impressive that as many as 14.5 percent of undergraduates get mostly A’s. That seems very high -- though by Harvard standards, it isn’t.”
Mr. Mansfield speculated that higher grades are still prevalent among students who “aren’t manifestly incompetent.” Those who receive C’s and D’s, he said, are likely to be “marginal students, who perhaps don’t belong in colleges or have difficulty staying in college.”
Laura Horn, one of the authors of the report, said it is important to consider the scope of the statistics -- which include data from two-year community colleges and for-profit universities -- before drawing conclusions about grade inflation. “I think the issue of grade inflation has mostly been at the more-selective four-year institutions. Community colleges enroll all levels of students, regardless of academic preparation,” said Ms. Horn, a co-director of statistical analysis and data design at MPR Associates Inc., an education-consulting company based in Berkeley, Calif., which helped to prepare the report.
Indeed, according to the report, 38.2 percent of community-college students received C’s and D’s or lower -- a higher percentage than any other type of institution.
“I don’t think it’s too surprising,” said Norma Kent, a spokeswoman for the American Association of Community Colleges. “We have a very high proportion of people who are working. For them to keep up with their studies is quite a challenge.”
Diverse Population
More than 31 percent of all students working full time while enrolled as undergraduates received C’s and D’s or lower, a slightly higher percentage than those who worked part time and those who did not have a job, the report says. But full-time employment does not inevitably result in academic mediocrity, according to the report.
Nearly 20 percent of the students who worked full time received mostly A’s -- once again, a higher percentage than that of students who did not work or worked part time.
Over all, the new report shows that the percentage of students receiving C’s and D’s has increased. In a report profiling about 16.7 million undergraduates during the 1995-96 academic year, researchers found that 25 percent received C’s and D’s or lower, with slightly more than 37 percent of African-American students receiving such grades. The number of students receiving mostly A’s was also lower than in the 1999-2000 report, at 13.3 percent.
Other findings from the report include:
* More than half of undergraduates (55 percent) received some form of financial aid, averaging about $6,200. Forty-four percent of all undergraduates received grants, averaging $3,500, and 29 percent received student loans, averaging $5,100. Many students received several types of financial aid.
* The amount of aid increased as tuition and other costs rose, and decreased as family income went up. More students received financial aid at for-profit universities than at any other type of institution.
* More than a third of undergraduates (37.8 percent) worked full time while enrolled as students, and 5 percent of undergraduates held work-study jobs.
* About 75 percent of undergraduates were considered “nontraditional” because of their age, financial status, or when they enrolled in college. Roughly 27 percent of undergraduates were parents, including 13 percent who were single parents.
* Almost three-quarters of undergraduates (70.6 percent) reported having credit cards in their own name. Those who carried a balance reported that it averaged $3,100.
Above all, said Ms. Horn, the report underscores the diverse range of students pursuing an undergraduate education. “A lot of students carry a risk of leaving postsecondary education,” she said. “Making institutions aware of the diversity of the population and the needs of students can only be beneficial.”
UNDERGRADUATE GRADE-POINT AVERAGES, 1999-2000
| | C’s and D’s or lower | B’s and C’s | Mostly B’s | A’s and B’s | Mostly A’s |
| All undergraduates | 33.5% | 16.4% | 24.6% | 10.9% | 14.5% |
| Type of institution attended |
| Public 4-year | 34.4% | 21.2% | 25.1% | 9.7% | 9.7% |
| Private nonprofit 4-year | 22.4% | 18.2% | 30.1% | 14.4% | 15.0% |
| Public 2-year | 38.2% | 13.2% | 22.3% | 9.8% | 16.6% |
| All private for-profit | 25.6% | 12.1% | 23.8% | 16.2% | 22.3% |
| Class level |
| Graduating senior | 15.8% | 21.9% | 34.5% | 14.7% | 13.0% |
| All other undergraduates | 35.4% | 15.8% | 23.6% | 10.5% | 14.7% |
| Sex |
| Men | 38.8% | 16.6% | 22.6% | 9.6% | 12.4% |
| Women | 29.4% | 16.2% | 26.2% | 12.0% | 16.2% |
| Racial and ethnic group |
One race
|
| American Indian | 41.8% | 16.9% | 23.3% | 9.7% | 8.3% |
| Asian | 32.2% | 17.7% | 26.4% | 10.1% | 13.6% |
| Black | 48.9% | 16.0% | 20.3% | 7.5% | 7.3% |
| Native Hawaiian or other Pacific islander | 39.6% | 19.7% | 22.3% | 9.7% | 8.7% |
| White | 30.3% | 16.2% | 25.3% | 11.7% | 16.5% |
| Other | 39.3% | 17.8% | 24.3% | 9.5% | 9.0% |
 |
| More than one race | 34.0% | 15.8% | 25.8% | 11.9% | 12.5% |
|
| Hispanic (may be any race) | 41.8% | 16.7% | 23.7% | 8.3% | 9.6% |
| Dependent status |
| Financially dependent on parents | 38.2% | 18.8% | 25.2% | 9.4% | 8.4% |
| Financially independent | 29.0% | 14.0% | 24.1% | 12.4% | 20.6% |
| Age as of December 31, 1999 |
| 18 or younger | 42.6% | 14.7% | 23.4% | 9.4% | 10.0% |
| 19 to 23 | 38.1% | 19.0% | 25.1% | 9.4% | 8.3% |
| 24 to 29 | 33.3% | 16.9% | 24.7% | 10.3% | 14.9% |
| 30 to 39 | 23.1% | 13.2% | 25.9% | 14.8% | 23.0% |
| 40 and older | 20.1% | 10.1% | 22.0% | 14.8% | 33.0% |
| Note: The figures are from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, a nationally representative survey that obtained data from more than 900 colleges about 62,000 students who enrolled at some point between July 1, 1999, and June 30, 2000. Figures may not add to 100 percent because of rounding. |
| SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education |
http://chronicle.com Section: Students Page: A37