Monday, September 29th, 2008...9:16 am
Grading system petition update
The 1Ls are up in arms about the new grading system–and why they’re not getting a piece of the pie. Below is the full copy of the petition. Like other recent posters, I agree that the current system is superior. A critique of the petition is to come.
— Hereford
Dean Kagan,
We are the Harvard Law School J.D. Class of 2011. We write to welcome your recently announced reforms to the grading system at HLS, and to express our strong unified belief that these reforms should be implemented this year.
As students we are aware of the new grading system’s many important advantages. The traditional grading scale relies on the premise that student performance can be measured accurately with an extreme degree of precision. We support setting aside that unrealistic and artificial notion, and the creation of a grading system that does not purport to discriminate between students’ abilities more finely than what law school exams can measure. In adopting its new system, Harvard will thereby strengthen the integrity of grades themselves. A new grading system will also enable students to engage the learning experience more fully by freeing them from undue pressure to focus on the testing process instead. And student life outside the classroom promises to bloom, as students become more ready to invest time and effort in journals, practice organizations, and community outreach—now with less fear that such enriching opportunities will result in a lower class rank. These advantages
are clearly borne out at Yale and Berkeley, and were doubtless among the reasons that Stanford’s faculty—and now our own—decided to reform the grading system.The same principles which justify Harvard’s new grading system also demand that the system be applied as broadly as possible. The Class of 2011 deserves fair grades, rich learning, and a balanced student life no less than does the Class of 2012. Although we chose Harvard with full knowledge of its traditional grading system, we did so in spite of that system, not because of it. The signatures on this letter are proof. We emphasize that, new grading system or old, we cannot imagine attending another law school. The opportunities at Harvard are too vast and exciting for any grading system to overshadow. Our signatures are not an expression of dissatisfaction, but rather a request that we be allowed to fully enjoy and invest in all that Harvard Law School has to offer.
Your announcement of grading reforms comes at an ideal time for current 1Ls. Now that orientation has ended and anticipation of exams has set in, the realities of traditional grading have already begun affecting how we experience Harvard. Yet because no exams or significant assignments have been given so far, our class could quickly transition to the new grading system without discernible cost to students, professors, or administrators. Given the tremendous benefits and negligible costs involved, we strongly urge you to hear our unified voice. We ask only for what next year’s new students will have: the opportunity to gain as much from our time at Harvard Law School as we can.
Your Students,
The Class of 2011
3 Comments
September 29th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Actually, the dean is going to decide whether or not to apply the system to current 1Ls, and wants our input. 1Ls are not “up in arms” because “they’re NOT getting a piece of the pie.” Whether we get a piece of the pie remains to be seen; 1Ls have feelings both ways, and that is why we are “up in arms” (although I do think you exaggerate).
The correct question is not what system to apply, but when to apply it… the decision has already been made to switch the system. So we can debate the merits of grades vs. no grades all we want, but it’s irrelevant. The relevant concern is solely one of timing. Saying that 1Ls shouldn’t get the new system because the new system is worse than the current really isn’t a relevant argument, which is where it seems like you are planning to go.
But go ahead, critique away……….
September 29th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Anon,
I respectfully disagree. I do not believe this issue completely rests on timing as you say. It will be implemented next year and beyond, so for those classes, you are correct, the point is moot. However, for the current classes, I think it appropriate to argue the merits of the system. Without debating the merits of the grading system, there is no argument at all. Rather we just have two “passionate” groups of people, one for grades, the other not. If this were the case, there would be no reason to hold the town hall at all. In fact, if this were just an issue of timing, the decision wouldn’t really be much of one to talk about. But, we cannot rest this issue solely on timing. If we do so, we ignore a central part of the debate, that is how a change in system would affect the 1L class (and by extension, 2L and 3L), which is an argument that, in my opinion, should be based on the merits of a grading system. To use your logic, saying that 1Ls should get the new system just because all future classes will is not much of an argument in and of itself either. That’s why we need to focus more on the merits of the argument.
-Brutus
September 29th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
I agree with Brutus that it is still relevant to discuss the merits of the system in terms of whether or not it applies to current students. It seems clear to me that the Administration’s primary concern here is to remain competitive in terms of admission statistics. If they decide that this in the overall interests of the law school, then that’s fine. It’s their prerogative. Frankly, I can respect a school that doesn’t pretend to ask for student input when it really doesn’t want it. However, the admissions goals of the grade change can be fully achieved without applying the change to our class. Given that there are at least serious concerns with the new system, it makes sense to discuss the merits of the two systems insofar as it applies to us in particular. Otherwise, as Brutus said, what are we even discussing?
Regardless of whether people prefer the new or old system, I hope that we can all agree that a mixed system that changes part-way through our education would be the worst result of all. It seems obvious to me that this is the worst of both worlds. It deprives students of a three-year record reflecting the nuances of their academic performance while ensuring that they will be extremely stressed out about their first year grades, far more than they might otherwise be. I think it would be wise for all students at the town hall meeting to be clear that we would strongly object to any such solution.