If a grade modification system is implemented, there will be an additional burden upon professors in student grading. No longer will professors be able to give a flat letter grade; instead, they will have to issue a more precise grade which will require more time for them to generate. Also, the subjective nature of some H&SS courses does not lend itself well to grade modifiers. If the proposal is implemented, grading discrepancies between technical courses and H&SS courses will become even more apparent.

Furthermore, there will be less standardization between different sections of the same course with different professors. This contradicts one of the main arguments that the Faculty Senate gave for grade modifiers—“It will allow for more precise and fairer grading.” Under the current system, a buffer exists that allows for slight variations within students’ grades to enable professors of the same course number to have slightly different grading policies. This distinction will become more apparent in courses that have different tests between sections, for example Calculus I and II. However, it wouldn’t have much effect on courses that give a standardized test to all of the sections, such as Physics I and II.

Also, with some tests being worth such a large percentage of students’ grades, one wrong answer could spell the difference between one grade modification level and the next. Should students really be put under this much pressure to perform when one question could affect their entire GPA?

Apathy has always been an issue of concern on this campus; just take the recent student elections as an example. There was such a lack of participation in elections, that the primaries, an important part of the election process, had to be canceled. The Rensselaer campus has always been extremely motivated towards academic excellence. With that said, under a grade modification system, students who strive for perfection will no longer be satisfied with just an “A.” Potentially, there could be such an increased drive towards better grades that it will decrease students’ participation in clubs and activities.

Upon entering Rensselaer, students are already highly motivated to excel in their classes. This is evident by the fact that 58 percent of the incoming freshman were in the top 10 percent of their high school graduating class. Of that 58 percent of students, the majority will probably continue to achieve A’s and B’s. With such a large percentage already in the top of their class, no additional stress is needed for students who already feel the pressure to succeed.

Another main argument that the Faculty Senate provided was that “It will give students a better opportunity to improve their grades.” This idea was refuted in the above paragraph and is further proven wrong in the RPI grading data—provided on a link from the Faculty Senate website. If one compares the normal GPA average and the plus/minus GPA average listed on this website, most of the averages will decrease for the courses listed. Based on that data, this seems to contradict the quote offered at the beginning of this paragraph.

The distribution of references that is listed on the Faculty Senate website is quite narrow. First of all, of the schools listed, none of them are in the Northeast, rather they are referencing schools in the Southern and Western parts of the U.S. Also, the presentation does not compare other technical schools within the Northeast region, such as RIT and MIT.

Given all of these facts, we strongly urge you, the student body, to support us in this matter, and furthermore, to encourage the faculty and professors to vote “No” on the Grade Modifiers Proposal taking place at the end of April!

Aaron Aguiar, MGMT ’05