Intentional grade inflation

I bribed the students with 2.5% extra credit to do the SRTE questionnaire. Last year, after a lot of verbal cajoling, I got the return rate to 58%. This year, with the grade-inflating incentive, I got the return rate to 86%.  That’s probably an important difference (though how would be know?): I imagine that extra quarter of the class contains the students without strong feelings.

grade inflation.jpg

But the shameless bribery had the following consequences
One student who failed, passed. 
Two students on a D got a C.
One student on a C got a C+. 
Three on a C+ got a B-. 
Nine B-‘s got a B. 
14 B’s got an A-. 
8 A-‘s got an A. 
I do worry about grade inflation, which is a nation-wide (and indeed international) problem. In this particular case, there are some advantages with the 2.5% freebie. First, I do get full feedback (an 86% return rate is rare for large classes). Second, this freebie encourages me to keep my tests hard. And third, there are always a few students on boundaries who want their mark to be higher. It is much easier to say no if their true score was actually 2.5% lower. 
On balance, I think I’ll do the same again next year – unless I get a rapped on the knuckles by the University when word gets around.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *