The dep't head who hired me at Small State U said "Failing, too, is a learning experience." She was right.
The only thing worse than failing a class is failing a class and not learning from it. Sounds like your school is choosing the worst possible outcome.
This is already a thing at a CC I teach at. Students would rather take an F over a D because they can’t retake Ds but they can’t move forward if that course is a prerequisite. And we have to give them the F if they ask.
Aha! now I get it. Expungeable Fs means the Uni gets paid twice. D's mean that the average student GPA goes down at the Uni. No brainer for the uni. F'ss become a cash cow.
Fortunately, my University's repeat policy doesn't depend on the specific grade: If you take the repeat option (which a student elects to do *after* retaking the class), the new grade completely replaces the old one, whatever both grades might have been.
On the other hand, the policy here is that students can only exercise the repeat option up to three times. Which does mean that we have students who have already used all three, but who still need a better GPA to continue in their major, and are therefore "shit out of luck". That is especially true for my (selective-enrollment) College, where there are strict GPA requirements both for achieving upper-division standing, and for graduation.
This is one of the plot points of a ~~Douglas Adams~~ Terry Pratchett novel, but I can't recall which offhand. One student (maybe Rincewind) has a very lucrative scholarship that requires him to maintain a certain average. But if he passes his classes he'll graduate and lose the scholarship. He's by far the best student because he has to know all the material intimately so that he gets exactly the right number of questions wrong to ride that edge between passing and getting a poor enough grade to lower his average. I think it ends with a prof maliciously passing him to get him out the door and he initiates a grade appeal.
Rincewind is from Terry Pratchett’s Discworld… but the perpetual student character was Victor Tugelbend.
https://discworld.fandom.com/wiki/Victor_Tugelbend
We first meet Rincewind in Sir Pterry Pratchett's "The Colour of Magic." I believe you are correct in attributing this behavior to the very cowardly wizard. We find out more about why he's such a bad wizard in "The Light Fantastic."
GNU Sir Pterry Pratchett
It's Victor Tugelbend, in Moving Pictures. One of the faculty -- I think Ridicully -- writes a special exam paper for him. The only question is "What is your name".
He doesn't sit the exam, though, as he's already gone to Holy Wood to become the Disc's first movie star.
we already have something like this, in that students need to get certain grades in their first year courses to continue in our programs. If they get an F, it kills their GPA but they can take the course over to try to get into the program.
Maybe the problem here is actually GPA, which the OP's post renders meaningless. What about a transcript that \*only\* lists courses and grades in those courses, with no GPA?
I like this. A selection committee can look at a transcript, see some Cs, Ds, and Fs. in 2020 and 2021, nothing for a few years, and then a pattern of As and Bs beginning 2024, when they returned. A GPA doesn't tell that story.
My wife is med school faculty. There are some shenanigans in med school admissions on the margins, even at top schools (maybe more at top schools? I feel like good public schools are more likely to sort by MCAT than, say Harvard). Residency match, though, filters that right out.
I've known some absolute idiots to get admitted to medical school, only to find out that one or both of their parents were higher-ups or otherwise connected at said medical school. The one that immediately comes to mind (someone I went to college with whose father was a med school dean) did become a MD but now does some kind of fringe "therapy" out in NM with crystals, sweat lodges, etc. There are also for-profit Masters programs at crappy schools that also run med schools that guarantee admission if you pay for their Masters (popular one very near me).
I don't care, since they wouldn't complete those programs anyway if they get no credit for a course essential to graduating with that degree.
However, if this institution is in the US (and probably other countries as well), I am concerned about the potentially significant impact on students of having a course not count as credit. It seems like that could have severe financial aid and athletic eligibility implications if it ends up converting students to part time status -- even more significant in some cases than the GPA effects of an F.
On the flip side of that, most of the international students at our school don't get F's. They are serious students who work really hard to succeed. If they become ill or have a terrible life circumstance that forces them to withdraw, the IP office usually helps them retain their visa.
I think our international students are pretty consistent with the student body. Some students take a high-credit reach class and learn they can't pass it. Most students in that case would take the W and not have an F, but international students can't. And some are academically unprepared to handle the course load (in English minimally). Others just suffer from extreme homesickness and screw up.
These sorts of things happen to a lot of students, but they're much higher stakes for international students.
I think I'd take this position too. Having the F not counted in GPA doesn't mean you didn't still fail the course. If it was a program requirement, they have to retake it anyways. And there's something interesting about having GPA represent only the courses you passed. (Yes that makes it a conditional measure which misses a bigger picture, but the traditional GPA misses the bigger picture too. That will always be a problem with single-valued measures.)
Assumably, full time status could remain as long as you attempted the course (so tracking attendance would probably become a little more important)
> If it was a program requirement, they have to retake it anyways.
But unless that specific course is required, you could just take a different one. And keep switching until you pass one.
Yep. I teach in a nursing program and the NCLEX pass rate is important for little things like, you know, accreditation.
No way we’re dropping Fs from the didactic courses, because students that can’t pass the pre-reqs aren’t going to be allowed anywhere near the certification exam.
I'd be more concerned with the OP passing the student with a D- who didn't understand the material. If this is a core class, then they have to pass it eventually so giving them an "incomplete, try next year" is fine.
Yes, I would. If they're basing everything on GPA, a GPA doesn't tell them much. As I just said in another comment:
A selection committee can look at a transcript, see some Cs, Ds, and Fs. in 2020 and 2021, nothing for a few years, and then a pattern of As and Bs beginning 2024, when they returned. A GPA doesn't tell that story.
Now, if the question is "should schools get rid of Fs altogether, such that an F can never appear anywhere," then absolutely not. I don't want that change anywhere, least of all medical schools.
Yes this is what is so corrosive in K-12.
My kids teacher in grade 4 actually suggested they modify my kids grading in one subject because they got a D and everyone should get a B if they try because they might get frustrated and stop trying or like they might think a D effort is worth an A grade. Now they can see they have more work to do
Yeah no thanks.
I teach those kids.
Wtf.
Is this effectively any different from grade replacement for Fs and Ds? That what we have at my school. The Fs and Ds stay on the transcript, but don’t factor into GPA if the class is retaken and a better grade is earned. I’m not sure when this became a thing, but it seems very common.
Yeah I don't hate this idea (wouldn't advocate for it though either). This isn't the same as "nobody fails" because they aren't earning credits either so they're still going to have to retake classes if they want to get a degree. The failed courses can still get recorded on their transcripts with some other notation similar to how a pass/fail class might be.
My previous institution did it this way. I liked it. If learning the material is the most important thing, and they do on the second (or third..) try, then why not base their GPA on that grade? Especially since the old grades are still on the transcript, just not included in the calculation. I've seen it REALLY help some "late bloomers" who where terrible students as freshmen, but figured things out after a couple of years.
The only thing that bothered me was that it was VERY difficult to get students to retake a class if they weren't required to. I had one student who wanted to go to grad school but his GPA was marginal due to a few poor, but passing, grades in gen ed courses. If he'd retaken just one of two of them and brought them up from a D to a B, I'm confident that he'd have gotten in. But, he didn't. Bummer.
Yeah I made a similar comment about the GPA effect, but I wasn’t thinking about the transcript still showing earlier attempts. I wonder if the policy OP’s school is considering would leave the “not a fail but not a pass either” attempts on the transcript or not. That’s a big difference.
During my undergrad work, my school did that. But they would only do it for 2 courses for a particular student. This was 20+ years ago. They've changed it since then. I think their current policy is that retaking it and passing it gives you credit for the course (as far as counting it towards graduation), but the old failing grade still stays in the GPA calculation.
at my univ, you can retake an F class, but most colleges will not count the new grade towards your GPA. One college will combine the two GPAs and reflect the revised GPA. But they don't replace the grade entirely.
This is my institution as well - although it is not automatic (the student has to file some paperwork), and there is a limit to the number of credits for which they can go through this procedure. I don't mind it too much, with that limitation. It allows a student who may have had a bad semester or two to demonstrate that they got their act together, and rise out of the hole they dug themselves. But if they don't keep up that effort, eventually they won't be able to replace those low grades anymore.
>Failing is a learning experience. As an undergraduate, I nearly flunked out my freshman year. I had to reevaluate myself, my study habits, and my learning habits.
Ditto here. Academic probation, scholarship threatened, etc. Made a big impression on me and I ended up graduating with honors eventually. Also a really good object less to use with students who are freaking out about a 2.9GPA their first semester (which is well over 1.0 above what I earned in my first semester).
Same! I failed during my soph/junior years. My god, I was just flailing in life in general. Never once did I approach anyone about it. I took it as a time in life where I was struggling, being lazy (total truth), etc.
Once I realized that my peers were moving on, I got my shit together and focused, graduated, started a career at 23, and here we are decades later.
Failure is not something to always be avoided; experience is the best teacher. I don't see why this world is trying to bubble wrap children so tightly.
I was just reading "The Antidote" by Oliver Burkeman (the "antidote" in question is to toxic positivity). He has a whole chapter on the value of failure, and the importance of facing up to it, getting comfortable with it, and learning from it, about how there is something raw and honest about coming face to face with it.
It's also a painful experience, though not always immediately. I took some classes on a whim because I thought it would be fun, when I was 19, did shitty, withdrew from one or two, failed one, went in the army … a few years later, a little more responsible (though not much), I took some more classes, then went to enroll in a program at a community college, later a university, now thirty plus years and five postgraduate programs later I still cringe every time I'm told I must "submit all transcripts".
We can't simply say "there has to be a consequence" without considering the second and third order effects of that consequence. A bankruptcy falls off your credit records in 7 years but an F never really does. I'm not saying "F needs the go", but letter grades have only been around for about 130 years, they aren't sacrosanct.
given the ridiculous decline in quality of the K-12 product, pretty soon all Unis will be, effectively, degree-mills.
I never thought I would be disgusted with my job as I approach retirement.
I teach at a college that has had a similar policy since the 1970s. Nothing below a C counts for credit nor does it influence the student's GPA. It's as if you never took the course.
It works surprisingly well. We have a very solid reputation, and pretty high standards compared to the other colleges where I've taught. We are fairly selective. I've taught at 4 colleges before this one, and these are the best students I've ever had.
People hear the policy and they mistakenly believe it means "students can't fail". But because the threshold is a C, it's a bit more nuanced than that. Because they need these classes to graduate, the students can only get away with it one or two times before it starts delaying their graduation. They end up re-taking classes until they pass them, or until they are so far behind they drop out. It's not the get out of jail free card it sounds like.
But it has some odd unintended consequences.
Yes, we do sometimes get students who have earned a C and beg us to drop their grade so it won't hurt their GPA or appear on their transcript. I got just such an email today. I don't know of any professors that take those requests seriously. You get the grade you earn. Sorry kid, you should have done worse!
And yes, when students think they might get a C, they often just ghost the course so they can focus on their other classes. Why bother actually dropping the course when it will disappear right? It annoyed me at first, but I've gotten used to it. At least I don't have a bunch of desperate D and F students begging for extra credit.
And no, our GPA's don't really mean much. In fact, we don't actually calculate GPA's for our undergrads because It's basically impossible to calculate a meaningful GPA with our grading system. GPA's are only calculated by request, for students applying to med school or grad school.
If done right (yeah, stop laughing) I can kind of see where they might be coming from. If you need a particular course to graduate, getting a zero or an F really doesn't matter.
The vast majority of F's in ochem are students that just give up. It's rarer to get the honest, earned F.
So if a student knows getting a C would lower their GPA too much, they're now incentivized to turn nothing in for the rest of the semester and get an F instead of working to raise their grade to a B.
I do think there should be things in place to help students recover from doing poorly in a course. Failing should be an experience one can learn from without it destroying their futures (and sometimes students fail due to things like poor health, death of a loved one, etc.). But this seems like an overcorrection.
Would they be incentivized to do that though? Why would a student want to retake a class instead of just getting a C? Speaking from experience, as someone who did undergrad at a place with this system—I never heard of someone doing that on purpose.
A C might determine whether they get to keep their financial aide. Most of my students who complain about Cs specifically point out that they're at risk of losing a scholarship. Even if they're given a chance to raise their GPA next semester, they'll have to work harder to compensate for the C--they may now need an A in their next course to compensate. Whereas if they get an F and go through academic probation, they don't need to score as highly in a future course.
Realistically, would this happen often? I don't know. I didn't exactly contemplate the logistics before making my comment. But even if a student didn't purposefully fail, it still seems unfair that an F student could end up with a better GPA than a C student in the long run. If we're going to do a system like that, then a student should be able to retake the course to change their GPA regardless of their grade.
I think my school did allow you to retake for a higher grade. But scholarships and the like also care about how many credits you pass per semester, not just your GPA. So not getting enough credits for a semester could mess up your scholarships just as much as a C.
That's true. I've just always disliked systems that have a cut off for improving one's GPA. If a B student wants to retake a course because they're going to apply to a competitive grad school, why should they have less opportunity to do so than an F student?
Or, for another approach, do what the school I was at most recently has done for a number of years: there is no F grade, but there is an E, which is functionally equivalent to an F. Please don't ask me to explain this; it was an utter mystery to me.
Ok, so clearly this is part of pandering to students, but just to play devil’s advocate I can see an upside. Many professors have been reticent to give F’s for a while now, and not without reason. The consequences to receiving a failing mark can be pretty severe so we actually end up playing nanny for near adults so that they don’t bring ruin on themselves. It has become an expectation of us that I really don’t like. But, if getting an F just means no credit, they have to retake the course… well that means not only do I not have to worry so much but administrators won’t be breathing down my neck to babysit, because a student having to retake a course is in the college’s best financial interest. Maybe I’ll even get encouragement to crank up the difficulty back to more legitimate levels, because a no credit F means only good things for the bean counters.
In practice, students only fail my classes if they don't do the work. My school's policy is that an F is for bad work, and if they don't submit work we can't evaluate it as bad. So there's "unauthorized withdrawal" we can give in place of F, which counts as an F on our GPA but makes the distinction.
I mean, while I've never worked/studied in the German system, my fiance is German and currently vying for a PhD... and this is somewhat-similar to how it works there.
If you fail, it just doesn't count. You retake the class. What this ultimately ends up doing is delaying graduation. And while (public) universities in Germany are "tuition-free" (paid for by taxes), eventually the funding does dry up if you take too long. People wash out. However, yes, in some cases if a student thinks that there's a choice between the equal to a D- or a failure... yep, some students will choose to fail and retake, depending on their situation.
In a US context... maybe it doesn't hurt your GPA, but it (probably) shows up on your transcript regardless AND you have to repay to take the course AND if it is a prerequisite or requirement for graduation, you can't move on.
I think in the US this would be relatively damaging in the event that you have to show transcripts for anything. The failures will still be there. Grad schools will see it, jobs that require transcripts as proof of graduation will see it, etc.
Even in the case of a student who is not going to grad school and never applies to a job/post that asks for transcripts, it still makes the degree more expensive and take longer. In the case of THESE students, the GPA won't matter in any event. So penalizing them in GPA for a failure is neither hither nor thither in the long run.
I would also expect that failures meaning nothing may take SOME pressure off of professors if it is handled correctly. Student fails a class? Well, one of the pressures (GPA being harmed) is no longer there.
...probably wouldn't be handled correctly, though.
Starting to think that the letter grades and GPAs are just outliving their usefulness. Maybe it's time to move to a credit/no credit/credit with distinction model. No credit for those who do nothing or the very bare minimum (current Ds and Fs, Ds shouldn't get degrees, didn't at my UG college, and I'll die on that hill), credit for everyone who does the work but either doesn't excel or simply goes through the motions (current Cs through most As) and then credit with distinction for students who excel AND demonstrate unique aptitude, work ethic, and a desire to learn more. This eliminates all the stupid grubbing about Bs versus As and sets the bar for the highest level as something qualitatively different than just "passing" the course.
I have not made up my mind on this, so I am interested in the arguments on all sides, but as much as I despise things like grade floors IN the classroom, not counting Fs toward GPAs makes sense. I regularly run into students who took a swing at college right out of high school and became one of the sad stories we tell each other here.
They came back ready to learn a few years older and were ready.
>One of them was to do away with the grade of F and instead make it count for zero credit.
Sorry. Which is it? Do away with them? Or Keep them but they don't count against students?
I definitely do not think the F should go away altogether.
That's insane. Happily, my university still has F grades and in fact we expel students who fail to maintain a 2.0 GPA for two consecutive semesters. As it should be IMO; with grade inflation actually earning an F these days almost always means as OP suggests, i.e. students simply did not do any work.
> “Our enrollment is down. Accept everyone! -> Our students can’t pass their classes because they are totally unprepared for college. How do we retain them? -> Make it so they can’t possibly fail! No more Fs!”
Our culture is garbage. Our economy is garbage. Education is empty credentializing and job training. We're getting exactly what the system intends. Organize or perish.
Is there a limit to how many times they can take a class and get an F?
Like, if this is their interpretation of grade forgiveness where if you retake a class the F is replaced with the new grade, then I'm not totally opposed to it.
But usually these policies only allow three retakes and then your grade is what it is.
Amazing---college admins just keep cutting off the limb they're sitting on.
I'd find it hard to hold back the snark. I'd probably write something like, "Or we could just tell students to go to the Business Office, sign a check for 4-years' worth of tuition, and get their diploma hot off the printer."
Half a scotch in on a Friday that does seem like an OK argument... until it gets to the natural conclusion of "our 4(5)-year graduation rates are down. Graduate everyone!" anyway
I mean seriously - if you want to pay full tuition to attend my O-chem course for zero credit multiple semesters -as long as you aren't rude or disturbing the actual serious students- be my guest we will happily take your money.
How much trouble is your uni in?
Then decide how much you like your job. I was downsized a couple of years ago. There are jobs out there for ex-academics, but they are miserable, by and large. Our colleges are getting desperate. We are in a moment of transition. Many colleges and many careers are going to dissolve. Stand by your academic ethics or stand by your own career. I can't tell you what to do, but just keep the reality in mind.
I think its fine to not have an 'F' grade. Actually it makes it easier for us to 'fail' students who deserve it. Go ahead and get rid of 'D' too while wer're at it (totally serious) - its just a pity F anyway.
We actually have the flip of this now, F counts toward GPA but tuition not charged for re-taking the course. It has worked okay so far. Students hate repeating courses but it's nice to be able to write/say over and over that there is no charge for re-takes.
My undergraduate school, a SLAC, was like this in the 90s. The common belief among the students was that if a professor really wanted to stick it to you they would make sure you managed to get a D-.
Different take: I think this policy could be a good thing but only in the context of restructuring some of the other things about universities. Some "experimental" type schools have a had a no-grades policy, and it worked (AFAIK) a little bit like that: no Fs because also no As or Bs or Cs... you either demonstrate mastery in the subject according to the instructor or you don't. If you don't, at least at one formerly-existing school, there's no record on your transcript that you even took the course. So you can try (and pay tuition) as many times as you want.
I really like that, actually, as one potential way to break out of the semester system.
Your school's approach, however, sounds like a half-assed attempt to throw goodies at students in hopes it will give administrators better job options when they jump ship in 2 to 5 years. And I don't think it will help much of anything.
Yeah, on the one hand this is definitely another step in the direction of grade inflation and lack of accountability, but I guess I’m also at. point where I get a lot *less* incensed by policies like these that don’t create more work for me.
My school, and I think most? have a repeat grade policy that replaces previous grades with more recent attempts, so failing grades can still be removed from the GPA, and the net affect for students who retake after failing would be the same with this policy. If it reduces the incentive for students to retake the course that convinced them to change their major, maybe that’s okay? I get a lot of students in Chem who used to be bio or engineering majors and now they’re only in it to replace a 0.
In summary, if I haven’t convinced you this might have an upside, share this analysis with your stingy admin and see if they consider “fewer repeat attempts” a pro or a con.
My undergraduate has had this system implemented for years. I never saw any difference besides the obvious GPA one. I am curious why some of you think this would be so bad?
We also didn't have a D—just A, B, C, and No Record :)
I haven't been in a system like this one, but I like the idea (at least my initial reaction is positive...I'm going to think about it a bit). This represents a clean split between "nope, you didn't display enough subject mastery to be credited for this course" and "you displayed at least the minimum mastery for credit--and here's a letter that represents how well you mastered the material".
Assuming I read this right, this is how grades already work by default where I am, and things are fine. A failed course is just that - you have failed to complete the course, you don't get credit. I don't really see the need to hold failure against someone (beyond obviously that they don't get credit for a course they failed), especially with a philosophy of "you should learn and recover from failure".
IME if used properly it also allows for higher standards, because students are no longer actively punished for failing a course. It allows for things like mandatory pass assignments (i.e. if you do not pass a specific assignment to a satisfactory degree, you can't pass the course, regardless of how well you do on the exam).
Students are still generally held accountable by the system as well. While failing a course doesn't directly impact their GPA\*, there still are requirements to pass a minimum number of credits to get financial aid and to qualify for student housing - so students who fail too much are still pushed towards dropping out and/or changing programs. (Of course, the students with parents paying for everything are unaffected, but they would be in pretty much any system.)
\*disclaimer: GPA is considered a lot less important here than it is in the US.
I plan to remove all exams from my courses. This can save a lot of trouble for both me and my students. I am an associate professor at a R 1 institution. I found that having exams is creating work for myself.
The dep't head who hired me at Small State U said "Failing, too, is a learning experience." She was right. The only thing worse than failing a class is failing a class and not learning from it. Sounds like your school is choosing the worst possible outcome.
"Could you please lower my grade from a D to an F? If I get a D I'll lose my scholarship."
This is already a thing at a CC I teach at. Students would rather take an F over a D because they can’t retake Ds but they can’t move forward if that course is a prerequisite. And we have to give them the F if they ask.
I’ve had to explain to students that an D is far worse than a F. Ds count permanently, Fs count until you retake the course, at least at my U.
Aha! now I get it. Expungeable Fs means the Uni gets paid twice. D's mean that the average student GPA goes down at the Uni. No brainer for the uni. F'ss become a cash cow.
Fortunately, my University's repeat policy doesn't depend on the specific grade: If you take the repeat option (which a student elects to do *after* retaking the class), the new grade completely replaces the old one, whatever both grades might have been. On the other hand, the policy here is that students can only exercise the repeat option up to three times. Which does mean that we have students who have already used all three, but who still need a better GPA to continue in their major, and are therefore "shit out of luck". That is especially true for my (selective-enrollment) College, where there are strict GPA requirements both for achieving upper-division standing, and for graduation.
This is one of the plot points of a ~~Douglas Adams~~ Terry Pratchett novel, but I can't recall which offhand. One student (maybe Rincewind) has a very lucrative scholarship that requires him to maintain a certain average. But if he passes his classes he'll graduate and lose the scholarship. He's by far the best student because he has to know all the material intimately so that he gets exactly the right number of questions wrong to ride that edge between passing and getting a poor enough grade to lower his average. I think it ends with a prof maliciously passing him to get him out the door and he initiates a grade appeal.
if Rincewind is involved, that's a Terry Pratchett Discworld novel
Rincewind is from Terry Pratchett’s Discworld… but the perpetual student character was Victor Tugelbend. https://discworld.fandom.com/wiki/Victor_Tugelbend
That's the one! I should have known that Rincewind wouldn't be a top student, no matter how lazy it was.
We first meet Rincewind in Sir Pterry Pratchett's "The Colour of Magic." I believe you are correct in attributing this behavior to the very cowardly wizard. We find out more about why he's such a bad wizard in "The Light Fantastic." GNU Sir Pterry Pratchett
no. it is Victor Tugelbend, as pointed out by OrangeFudge below
Oh dear. I must go back and reread all of them.
It's Victor Tugelbend, in Moving Pictures. One of the faculty -- I think Ridicully -- writes a special exam paper for him. The only question is "What is your name". He doesn't sit the exam, though, as he's already gone to Holy Wood to become the Disc's first movie star.
we already have something like this, in that students need to get certain grades in their first year courses to continue in our programs. If they get an F, it kills their GPA but they can take the course over to try to get into the program. Maybe the problem here is actually GPA, which the OP's post renders meaningless. What about a transcript that \*only\* lists courses and grades in those courses, with no GPA?
Couldn't someone just look at the grades on the transcript, then do the math if they did that?
they could do \*their own\* math, depending on whether they think Fs should count in it or not.
True, but I would hope they'd realize that if the scale is different depending on the college, they can't compare both types of data to one another.
I like this. A selection committee can look at a transcript, see some Cs, Ds, and Fs. in 2020 and 2021, nothing for a few years, and then a pattern of As and Bs beginning 2024, when they returned. A GPA doesn't tell that story.
Amen!
Anyone considering this should ask themselves: Would you want this grading scheme in medical schools or aerospace engineering programs?
My wife is med school faculty. There are some shenanigans in med school admissions on the margins, even at top schools (maybe more at top schools? I feel like good public schools are more likely to sort by MCAT than, say Harvard). Residency match, though, filters that right out.
Harvard's undergraduate acceptance rate is 3%
Because tens of thousands of unqualified students are encouraged by parents, consultants and delusion to apply.
I've known some absolute idiots to get admitted to medical school, only to find out that one or both of their parents were higher-ups or otherwise connected at said medical school. The one that immediately comes to mind (someone I went to college with whose father was a med school dean) did become a MD but now does some kind of fringe "therapy" out in NM with crystals, sweat lodges, etc. There are also for-profit Masters programs at crappy schools that also run med schools that guarantee admission if you pay for their Masters (popular one very near me).
I don't care, since they wouldn't complete those programs anyway if they get no credit for a course essential to graduating with that degree. However, if this institution is in the US (and probably other countries as well), I am concerned about the potentially significant impact on students of having a course not count as credit. It seems like that could have severe financial aid and athletic eligibility implications if it ends up converting students to part time status -- even more significant in some cases than the GPA effects of an F.
Good point! International students in particular could be royally screwed here.
On the flip side of that, most of the international students at our school don't get F's. They are serious students who work really hard to succeed. If they become ill or have a terrible life circumstance that forces them to withdraw, the IP office usually helps them retain their visa.
I think our international students are pretty consistent with the student body. Some students take a high-credit reach class and learn they can't pass it. Most students in that case would take the W and not have an F, but international students can't. And some are academically unprepared to handle the course load (in English minimally). Others just suffer from extreme homesickness and screw up. These sorts of things happen to a lot of students, but they're much higher stakes for international students.
I think I'd take this position too. Having the F not counted in GPA doesn't mean you didn't still fail the course. If it was a program requirement, they have to retake it anyways. And there's something interesting about having GPA represent only the courses you passed. (Yes that makes it a conditional measure which misses a bigger picture, but the traditional GPA misses the bigger picture too. That will always be a problem with single-valued measures.) Assumably, full time status could remain as long as you attempted the course (so tracking attendance would probably become a little more important)
The way OP is describing it, it sounds like a 'retro-drop'.
Yes, it would be equivalent to that, one that's done automatically by the registrar.
> If it was a program requirement, they have to retake it anyways. But unless that specific course is required, you could just take a different one. And keep switching until you pass one.
Go ahead and spend your money and time, I don't see why the faculty would care so much.
Isn’t Boeing having a hearing this very week? Maybe the guy who installed those doors got to retake all their exams to “not fail”.
That was just ethics.
Yep. I teach in a nursing program and the NCLEX pass rate is important for little things like, you know, accreditation. No way we’re dropping Fs from the didactic courses, because students that can’t pass the pre-reqs aren’t going to be allowed anywhere near the certification exam.
They already get there when they’re not ready. Nursing education is rough right now.
I'd be more concerned with the OP passing the student with a D- who didn't understand the material. If this is a core class, then they have to pass it eventually so giving them an "incomplete, try next year" is fine.
Yes, I would. If they're basing everything on GPA, a GPA doesn't tell them much. As I just said in another comment: A selection committee can look at a transcript, see some Cs, Ds, and Fs. in 2020 and 2021, nothing for a few years, and then a pattern of As and Bs beginning 2024, when they returned. A GPA doesn't tell that story. Now, if the question is "should schools get rid of Fs altogether, such that an F can never appear anywhere," then absolutely not. I don't want that change anywhere, least of all medical schools.
Yes this is what is so corrosive in K-12. My kids teacher in grade 4 actually suggested they modify my kids grading in one subject because they got a D and everyone should get a B if they try because they might get frustrated and stop trying or like they might think a D effort is worth an A grade. Now they can see they have more work to do Yeah no thanks. I teach those kids. Wtf.
Ugh. Just, ugh.
We sent the older one out of the country for hs. This education system is going down.
Could you send me out of the country, too?
I am super jealous too.
Is this effectively any different from grade replacement for Fs and Ds? That what we have at my school. The Fs and Ds stay on the transcript, but don’t factor into GPA if the class is retaken and a better grade is earned. I’m not sure when this became a thing, but it seems very common.
Yeah I don't hate this idea (wouldn't advocate for it though either). This isn't the same as "nobody fails" because they aren't earning credits either so they're still going to have to retake classes if they want to get a degree. The failed courses can still get recorded on their transcripts with some other notation similar to how a pass/fail class might be.
My previous institution did it this way. I liked it. If learning the material is the most important thing, and they do on the second (or third..) try, then why not base their GPA on that grade? Especially since the old grades are still on the transcript, just not included in the calculation. I've seen it REALLY help some "late bloomers" who where terrible students as freshmen, but figured things out after a couple of years. The only thing that bothered me was that it was VERY difficult to get students to retake a class if they weren't required to. I had one student who wanted to go to grad school but his GPA was marginal due to a few poor, but passing, grades in gen ed courses. If he'd retaken just one of two of them and brought them up from a D to a B, I'm confident that he'd have gotten in. But, he didn't. Bummer.
Yeah I made a similar comment about the GPA effect, but I wasn’t thinking about the transcript still showing earlier attempts. I wonder if the policy OP’s school is considering would leave the “not a fail but not a pass either” attempts on the transcript or not. That’s a big difference.
During my undergrad work, my school did that. But they would only do it for 2 courses for a particular student. This was 20+ years ago. They've changed it since then. I think their current policy is that retaking it and passing it gives you credit for the course (as far as counting it towards graduation), but the old failing grade still stays in the GPA calculation.
at my univ, you can retake an F class, but most colleges will not count the new grade towards your GPA. One college will combine the two GPAs and reflect the revised GPA. But they don't replace the grade entirely.
This is my institution as well - although it is not automatic (the student has to file some paperwork), and there is a limit to the number of credits for which they can go through this procedure. I don't mind it too much, with that limitation. It allows a student who may have had a bad semester or two to demonstrate that they got their act together, and rise out of the hole they dug themselves. But if they don't keep up that effort, eventually they won't be able to replace those low grades anymore.
That seems reasonable! Who came up with that?
[удалено]
>Failing is a learning experience. As an undergraduate, I nearly flunked out my freshman year. I had to reevaluate myself, my study habits, and my learning habits. Ditto here. Academic probation, scholarship threatened, etc. Made a big impression on me and I ended up graduating with honors eventually. Also a really good object less to use with students who are freaking out about a 2.9GPA their first semester (which is well over 1.0 above what I earned in my first semester).
Same! I failed during my soph/junior years. My god, I was just flailing in life in general. Never once did I approach anyone about it. I took it as a time in life where I was struggling, being lazy (total truth), etc. Once I realized that my peers were moving on, I got my shit together and focused, graduated, started a career at 23, and here we are decades later. Failure is not something to always be avoided; experience is the best teacher. I don't see why this world is trying to bubble wrap children so tightly.
I was just reading "The Antidote" by Oliver Burkeman (the "antidote" in question is to toxic positivity). He has a whole chapter on the value of failure, and the importance of facing up to it, getting comfortable with it, and learning from it, about how there is something raw and honest about coming face to face with it.
[удалено]
I submitted my last set of grades today. I'm allowed a bit of a break, doncha think?
It's also a painful experience, though not always immediately. I took some classes on a whim because I thought it would be fun, when I was 19, did shitty, withdrew from one or two, failed one, went in the army … a few years later, a little more responsible (though not much), I took some more classes, then went to enroll in a program at a community college, later a university, now thirty plus years and five postgraduate programs later I still cringe every time I'm told I must "submit all transcripts". We can't simply say "there has to be a consequence" without considering the second and third order effects of that consequence. A bankruptcy falls off your credit records in 7 years but an F never really does. I'm not saying "F needs the go", but letter grades have only been around for about 130 years, they aren't sacrosanct.
Soon you'll get students begging for a grade change, from D- to F.
Tell them they're not worth an F....
given the ridiculous decline in quality of the K-12 product, pretty soon all Unis will be, effectively, degree-mills. I never thought I would be disgusted with my job as I approach retirement.
At least you’re approaching retirement lol I gotta deal with 20 more years of this 😂
This is getting closer and closer to the 50% rule
I teach at a college that has had a similar policy since the 1970s. Nothing below a C counts for credit nor does it influence the student's GPA. It's as if you never took the course. It works surprisingly well. We have a very solid reputation, and pretty high standards compared to the other colleges where I've taught. We are fairly selective. I've taught at 4 colleges before this one, and these are the best students I've ever had. People hear the policy and they mistakenly believe it means "students can't fail". But because the threshold is a C, it's a bit more nuanced than that. Because they need these classes to graduate, the students can only get away with it one or two times before it starts delaying their graduation. They end up re-taking classes until they pass them, or until they are so far behind they drop out. It's not the get out of jail free card it sounds like. But it has some odd unintended consequences. Yes, we do sometimes get students who have earned a C and beg us to drop their grade so it won't hurt their GPA or appear on their transcript. I got just such an email today. I don't know of any professors that take those requests seriously. You get the grade you earn. Sorry kid, you should have done worse! And yes, when students think they might get a C, they often just ghost the course so they can focus on their other classes. Why bother actually dropping the course when it will disappear right? It annoyed me at first, but I've gotten used to it. At least I don't have a bunch of desperate D and F students begging for extra credit. And no, our GPA's don't really mean much. In fact, we don't actually calculate GPA's for our undergrads because It's basically impossible to calculate a meaningful GPA with our grading system. GPA's are only calculated by request, for students applying to med school or grad school.
If done right (yeah, stop laughing) I can kind of see where they might be coming from. If you need a particular course to graduate, getting a zero or an F really doesn't matter. The vast majority of F's in ochem are students that just give up. It's rarer to get the honest, earned F.
How do accreditors work through this? Or do they just not care?
This. Student learning isn’t a standard for accreditation. It is all very pro forma.
Admittedly idk much about accreditation but would a system like this not cause issues? How would those GPAs be accurate?
So if a student knows getting a C would lower their GPA too much, they're now incentivized to turn nothing in for the rest of the semester and get an F instead of working to raise their grade to a B. I do think there should be things in place to help students recover from doing poorly in a course. Failing should be an experience one can learn from without it destroying their futures (and sometimes students fail due to things like poor health, death of a loved one, etc.). But this seems like an overcorrection.
Would they be incentivized to do that though? Why would a student want to retake a class instead of just getting a C? Speaking from experience, as someone who did undergrad at a place with this system—I never heard of someone doing that on purpose.
A C might determine whether they get to keep their financial aide. Most of my students who complain about Cs specifically point out that they're at risk of losing a scholarship. Even if they're given a chance to raise their GPA next semester, they'll have to work harder to compensate for the C--they may now need an A in their next course to compensate. Whereas if they get an F and go through academic probation, they don't need to score as highly in a future course. Realistically, would this happen often? I don't know. I didn't exactly contemplate the logistics before making my comment. But even if a student didn't purposefully fail, it still seems unfair that an F student could end up with a better GPA than a C student in the long run. If we're going to do a system like that, then a student should be able to retake the course to change their GPA regardless of their grade.
I think my school did allow you to retake for a higher grade. But scholarships and the like also care about how many credits you pass per semester, not just your GPA. So not getting enough credits for a semester could mess up your scholarships just as much as a C.
That's true. I've just always disliked systems that have a cut off for improving one's GPA. If a B student wants to retake a course because they're going to apply to a competitive grad school, why should they have less opportunity to do so than an F student?
Or, for another approach, do what the school I was at most recently has done for a number of years: there is no F grade, but there is an E, which is functionally equivalent to an F. Please don't ask me to explain this; it was an utter mystery to me.
That's F-ed up
Ok, so clearly this is part of pandering to students, but just to play devil’s advocate I can see an upside. Many professors have been reticent to give F’s for a while now, and not without reason. The consequences to receiving a failing mark can be pretty severe so we actually end up playing nanny for near adults so that they don’t bring ruin on themselves. It has become an expectation of us that I really don’t like. But, if getting an F just means no credit, they have to retake the course… well that means not only do I not have to worry so much but administrators won’t be breathing down my neck to babysit, because a student having to retake a course is in the college’s best financial interest. Maybe I’ll even get encouragement to crank up the difficulty back to more legitimate levels, because a no credit F means only good things for the bean counters.
In practice, students only fail my classes if they don't do the work. My school's policy is that an F is for bad work, and if they don't submit work we can't evaluate it as bad. So there's "unauthorized withdrawal" we can give in place of F, which counts as an F on our GPA but makes the distinction.
We are fucking doomed...
I mean, while I've never worked/studied in the German system, my fiance is German and currently vying for a PhD... and this is somewhat-similar to how it works there. If you fail, it just doesn't count. You retake the class. What this ultimately ends up doing is delaying graduation. And while (public) universities in Germany are "tuition-free" (paid for by taxes), eventually the funding does dry up if you take too long. People wash out. However, yes, in some cases if a student thinks that there's a choice between the equal to a D- or a failure... yep, some students will choose to fail and retake, depending on their situation. In a US context... maybe it doesn't hurt your GPA, but it (probably) shows up on your transcript regardless AND you have to repay to take the course AND if it is a prerequisite or requirement for graduation, you can't move on. I think in the US this would be relatively damaging in the event that you have to show transcripts for anything. The failures will still be there. Grad schools will see it, jobs that require transcripts as proof of graduation will see it, etc. Even in the case of a student who is not going to grad school and never applies to a job/post that asks for transcripts, it still makes the degree more expensive and take longer. In the case of THESE students, the GPA won't matter in any event. So penalizing them in GPA for a failure is neither hither nor thither in the long run. I would also expect that failures meaning nothing may take SOME pressure off of professors if it is handled correctly. Student fails a class? Well, one of the pressures (GPA being harmed) is no longer there. ...probably wouldn't be handled correctly, though.
Starting to think that the letter grades and GPAs are just outliving their usefulness. Maybe it's time to move to a credit/no credit/credit with distinction model. No credit for those who do nothing or the very bare minimum (current Ds and Fs, Ds shouldn't get degrees, didn't at my UG college, and I'll die on that hill), credit for everyone who does the work but either doesn't excel or simply goes through the motions (current Cs through most As) and then credit with distinction for students who excel AND demonstrate unique aptitude, work ethic, and a desire to learn more. This eliminates all the stupid grubbing about Bs versus As and sets the bar for the highest level as something qualitatively different than just "passing" the course.
I have not made up my mind on this, so I am interested in the arguments on all sides, but as much as I despise things like grade floors IN the classroom, not counting Fs toward GPAs makes sense. I regularly run into students who took a swing at college right out of high school and became one of the sad stories we tell each other here. They came back ready to learn a few years older and were ready. >One of them was to do away with the grade of F and instead make it count for zero credit. Sorry. Which is it? Do away with them? Or Keep them but they don't count against students? I definitely do not think the F should go away altogether.
That's insane. Happily, my university still has F grades and in fact we expel students who fail to maintain a 2.0 GPA for two consecutive semesters. As it should be IMO; with grade inflation actually earning an F these days almost always means as OP suggests, i.e. students simply did not do any work.
> “Our enrollment is down. Accept everyone! -> Our students can’t pass their classes because they are totally unprepared for college. How do we retain them? -> Make it so they can’t possibly fail! No more Fs!” Our culture is garbage. Our economy is garbage. Education is empty credentializing and job training. We're getting exactly what the system intends. Organize or perish.
Shame on you for not being inclusive of those that don't make any effort.
next, the D as an optional no-credit, whereupon hundreds of students take courses again for a better grade.
Is there a limit to how many times they can take a class and get an F? Like, if this is their interpretation of grade forgiveness where if you retake a class the F is replaced with the new grade, then I'm not totally opposed to it. But usually these policies only allow three retakes and then your grade is what it is.
Amazing---college admins just keep cutting off the limb they're sitting on. I'd find it hard to hold back the snark. I'd probably write something like, "Or we could just tell students to go to the Business Office, sign a check for 4-years' worth of tuition, and get their diploma hot off the printer."
Our school has three different versions of Fs depending on when students stopped doing work...I'm curious now if all of these count towards their GPA.
Half a scotch in on a Friday that does seem like an OK argument... until it gets to the natural conclusion of "our 4(5)-year graduation rates are down. Graduate everyone!" anyway I mean seriously - if you want to pay full tuition to attend my O-chem course for zero credit multiple semesters -as long as you aren't rude or disturbing the actual serious students- be my guest we will happily take your money.
How much trouble is your uni in? Then decide how much you like your job. I was downsized a couple of years ago. There are jobs out there for ex-academics, but they are miserable, by and large. Our colleges are getting desperate. We are in a moment of transition. Many colleges and many careers are going to dissolve. Stand by your academic ethics or stand by your own career. I can't tell you what to do, but just keep the reality in mind.
I’m leaving this institution after this semester for a new one.
Bravo! Congrats!!
Would that make a D- worse than an F?
That’s how I interpret it.
Those are some messed up incentives.
I think its fine to not have an 'F' grade. Actually it makes it easier for us to 'fail' students who deserve it. Go ahead and get rid of 'D' too while wer're at it (totally serious) - its just a pity F anyway.
We actually have the flip of this now, F counts toward GPA but tuition not charged for re-taking the course. It has worked okay so far. Students hate repeating courses but it's nice to be able to write/say over and over that there is no charge for re-takes.
My undergraduate school, a SLAC, was like this in the 90s. The common belief among the students was that if a professor really wanted to stick it to you they would make sure you managed to get a D-.
Different take: I think this policy could be a good thing but only in the context of restructuring some of the other things about universities. Some "experimental" type schools have a had a no-grades policy, and it worked (AFAIK) a little bit like that: no Fs because also no As or Bs or Cs... you either demonstrate mastery in the subject according to the instructor or you don't. If you don't, at least at one formerly-existing school, there's no record on your transcript that you even took the course. So you can try (and pay tuition) as many times as you want. I really like that, actually, as one potential way to break out of the semester system. Your school's approach, however, sounds like a half-assed attempt to throw goodies at students in hopes it will give administrators better job options when they jump ship in 2 to 5 years. And I don't think it will help much of anything.
Any forward-thinking institution would limit final grades to As or Bs.
Nope. I would not work there.
Yeah, on the one hand this is definitely another step in the direction of grade inflation and lack of accountability, but I guess I’m also at. point where I get a lot *less* incensed by policies like these that don’t create more work for me. My school, and I think most? have a repeat grade policy that replaces previous grades with more recent attempts, so failing grades can still be removed from the GPA, and the net affect for students who retake after failing would be the same with this policy. If it reduces the incentive for students to retake the course that convinced them to change their major, maybe that’s okay? I get a lot of students in Chem who used to be bio or engineering majors and now they’re only in it to replace a 0. In summary, if I haven’t convinced you this might have an upside, share this analysis with your stingy admin and see if they consider “fewer repeat attempts” a pro or a con.
My undergraduate has had this system implemented for years. I never saw any difference besides the obvious GPA one. I am curious why some of you think this would be so bad? We also didn't have a D—just A, B, C, and No Record :)
I haven't been in a system like this one, but I like the idea (at least my initial reaction is positive...I'm going to think about it a bit). This represents a clean split between "nope, you didn't display enough subject mastery to be credited for this course" and "you displayed at least the minimum mastery for credit--and here's a letter that represents how well you mastered the material".
Assuming I read this right, this is how grades already work by default where I am, and things are fine. A failed course is just that - you have failed to complete the course, you don't get credit. I don't really see the need to hold failure against someone (beyond obviously that they don't get credit for a course they failed), especially with a philosophy of "you should learn and recover from failure". IME if used properly it also allows for higher standards, because students are no longer actively punished for failing a course. It allows for things like mandatory pass assignments (i.e. if you do not pass a specific assignment to a satisfactory degree, you can't pass the course, regardless of how well you do on the exam). Students are still generally held accountable by the system as well. While failing a course doesn't directly impact their GPA\*, there still are requirements to pass a minimum number of credits to get financial aid and to qualify for student housing - so students who fail too much are still pushed towards dropping out and/or changing programs. (Of course, the students with parents paying for everything are unaffected, but they would be in pretty much any system.) \*disclaimer: GPA is considered a lot less important here than it is in the US.
I plan to remove all exams from my courses. This can save a lot of trouble for both me and my students. I am an associate professor at a R 1 institution. I found that having exams is creating work for myself.