UCSC tried to address the grade trap by using a narrative evaluation system (NES), but capitulated to the demand for grades in 1997, when the university began to offer a letter grade option, and then
My alma mater, the College of Creative Studies at UCSB, did not offer letter grades. I transferred into the College as a sophomore. The absence of grades was a shock to my constitution. Eventually, that absence allowed for a pathway to greater achievement. Because I wasn't afraid of receiving low grades, I stopped pandering to what I thought my professors wanted. (Yes, I was shameless. It was all about the A. It was not so much about learning.) CCS pushed me into taking risks in my writing and in my thinking, risks I certainly would never have taken if I knew I were going to be graded on the efforts. I was always a hard-working student, and this didn't change; if anything, I worked even harder because there was no ceiling to what I could do.
Which sort of points out the biggest problem with a letter grade system: how it inhibits learning.
Learning requires failure and bumbling and getting things wrong. Students accustomed to getting As begin to feel that they should never fail--that they should know everything before they even learn it. That's crazy, isn't it?
I'm very interested to see how my daughters will respond to receiving evaluations instead of grades, especially as I've often been concerned about the value they place on grades, and about the choices they've made to do what they know is acceptable, rather than to launch into unknown territory.
From a study at the University of Poitiers, France via GOOD:
. . .new research in the American Psychological Association's Journal of Experimental Psychology: General concludes kids might perform better in school if teachers and parents sent the message that failing is a normal part of learning.As Einstein said, "A person who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new."