Based upon my three years of being a student at Butler University, I have noticed two different philosophies that professors have when it comes to evaluating, assessing and ultimately grading students. The drastic differences between these philosophies ultimately hurt students.

I did not realize this until one of my professors shared his thoughts on grade inflation to a small group of students before class. He told us that more students are getting “A’s” and “B’s” than they did when he first starting teaching at Butler a long time ago.

I thought about his classes and other classes that I have taken at Butler and immediately thought of another class that I took where the professor had similar ideas about students' grades. I then came up with two different philosophies of grading that I have seen professors use.

The first philosophy is what I consider the traditional one. The key component is that the average grade is a “C’. Emphasis is placed on distributing grades that when graphed form a bell curve.

An extreme form of this philosophy is that an “A” cannot be earned. No matter how hard a student studies or how much a student puts into a project the highest grade they can earn is a “B+” or “A-.”

The other philosophy I consider the contemporary one. Emphasis is placed on determining whether or not a student has learned the material. Students who accomplish this usually can earn at least a “B”. An “A” can be earned by making papers and projects very high quality that show the professor that the material was completely comprehended.

Obviously those are generalizations, but the generalizations demonstrate the key differences. Not everyone can fit in either category, but it’s usually fairly easy to tell which one a professor leans toward.

Those who use the traditional grading philosophy observe grade inflation by those who use the contemporary philosophy. This is due to the fact that an “A” or “B” can be earned.

Students want to leave Butler with the best resume possible. Part of building a high quality resume is getting high grades. High grades in classes are one of the ways to prove to potential employers the applicant has the knowledge he or she needs to do the job.

If students have the choice to take a course where one professor uses the contemporary grading system and another professor that teaches the same course uses the traditional grading system, students will pick the professor’s section that uses the contemporary grading system. This means that a student in one section may earn “C” for the same quality that a student in the other section who earns a “B.”

Students face the same issue when choosing a core class. It’s a safe assumption that if given a choice, students will choose a course where they can obtain an “A” or a “B” versus one where they will most likely get a "C" or "B."

The faculty should choose one of these philosophies. This will help professors use the same set of general expectations in all courses throughout the university. If choosing between the philosophies I described, the contemporary philosophy should be adopted.

The goal for the student when taking a class is to learn the material, and the professor’s goal is for everyone in the class to learn the material. This is what the contemporary philosophy emphasizes, thus this philosophy is educationally sound. Using rubrics is a must, that way the same standards are applied to everyone.

By adopting a common grading philosophy it will ensure that all professors use the same approach when evaluating students' work.