Regarding the Departmental Furor Over Grade Inflation

I completely agree with Dr. Baumlin's assessment of the "English Department Grade Inflation" situation. Even before I read his reply to Dr. Blackmon's e-mail, I was telling fellow teaching assistants that our department's grades should be higher because we use process-oriented pedagogy. If our students' first round of essays adhere to the standard bell curve prior to revision, then the combination of peer feedback, instructor feedback, and student revision should increase each student's grade. If the quality of their writing and thus their grades are not increasing from draft to draft, or assignment to assignment, then we are not doing our jobs as teachers of the writing process.

I also agree with Dr. Baumlin that assuming a stubborn, intransigent stance toward the administration will not do us any good. Instead, we need to closely analyze the context of the grade inflation numbers and justify our pedagogy. If we do indeed need to adjust our standards, then we can do that. But we should do it for good pedagogical reasons, not because a decontextualized, irrational fear of grade inflation says we should.

Finally, I partially agree with Jean Stringam's caustic indictment of the administration for encouraging retention (i.e. easier classes, higher grades) and then expressing shock and awe at grade inflation. I do not share her belief in the administration's hypocrisy. However, I do think it is rather interesting that we (as educators and a society) demand improved education and then question ourselves when assessment shows improvement. With this kind of attitude, we will never be happy with our educational institutions. They will always either be failing or coddling students.