At this point, nearly all agree that such a system should be implemented, but what remains to be decided is what form the system should take. Some favor posting mid-semester grades to SIS, while others would like to see professors meet with each student individually. While many favor a voluntary system, still others say it should be required. There is, however, an easier solution than those which have been debated most often.

At present, most professors provide students with the mean, median, and standard deviation of the grades on exams when they are handed back. This gives students an idea of how they performed against their peers, but there is no context with which to estimate the cumulative semester grade. This lack of context is what has led to the current efforts. The easiest solution to the problem is to provide that data—give the breakdowns for the entire class over the semester. When large assignments are returned, professors should provide the class with an overall distribution and post the statistical data along with a reminder of the grading policies. Students can measure their performance against their peers’ and infer what their grade will be if trends continue.

For those concerned about this proposal generating more work for professors, it will not; this is the perfect solution, since the tools are already available through WebCT. This ease of implementation also calms fears of noncompliance due to difficulty. For people concerned that students will argue over differences between midterm grades and final grades, this should not occur since no real grade is issued, just inferred.

No matter what final form this project takes on, it is a valuable new service, and should be supported by all students, faculty, and administrators in whatever ways possible.