|
NEWS
| DECEMBER 2, 2005
Plus Minus Grading System
Proposal against system approved
Graduate Student Senate adopts
resolution; input from faculty anticipated.
By Megan
Magaña
The Shorthorn staff
Graduate students adopted a resolution against the Plus Minus grading
system on Thursday, demonstrating continued opposition to its implementation.
The Graduate Student Senate passed the resolution 23-3, hoping to
influence the final decision, which will be made by President James
Spaniolo and Provost Dana Dunn. Faculty and administrators received
online surveys to provide more input as well.
John Heatherly, an electrical engineering graduate student and Graduate
Student Senate senator, said he voted for the resolution against
the proposed system, even though he saw its advantages and disadvantages.
“It could curb grade inflation,” he said. “But
I see it as really hurting guys that are typically your top students.”
Heatherly said the system looks good on the surface, but “its
final form could be a monster.”
Ambar Paranjape, exercise physiology graduate student, voted against
the resolution. He said he favors the proposed grading system. He
said ‘A’ students will remain ‘A’ students
regardless of the system they are under.
He said no grading system would dilute their passion for knowledge,
and that students should be rewarded for their efforts.
Faculty were asked to fill out and submit the survey, which was
drafted by the office of Institutional Research and Planning on
Thursday morning, said associate provost Michael Moore. It is available
online only for faculty and administrators until Dec. 19, when responses
are due.
Dr. Moore said the survey results will be presented to Dr. Dunn,
who will use feedback to make a decision on whether to adopt the
system or make changes to the current proposal. He said if approved,
there was no set timeline for its implementation and that the university
would have to do a lot of adjusting with computing, scholarships
and financial aid.
“There would be a lot of issues and details that would have
to be re-evaluated,” he said.
Zach Walker, Student Congress program director, said he’s
curious to see the survey, and he hopes faculty will take into consideration
all of the implications.
“It really hurts the high achieving, low ‘A’ student
that would now get a 3.67 instead of a 4.0,” he said. “They
can expect a lot of headaches from this, and understandably.”
Walker said Student Congress has encouraged students to let the
faculty know how they feel.
“From the response [SC] has received, students are resoundingly
against this,” he said. “I hope the faculty make the
best decision for everyone involved.”
|
|
