Spring Break
GPA can't weigh worth
by Samantha Shokin
Staff Writer
Op-Ed | 12/9/08
Posted online at 12:46 AM EST on 12/9/08
GPA: Genuinely pesky aggravation, greatly pointless analysis, general pain in the arse, or, most commonly, grade point average.
The abbreviated abomination makes me grit my teeth at the thought of it and roll my eyes at its mention. My parents think I'm just another whiney youngun' blaming the system for not catering to my laziness, but I know better. There is a problem with our academic system, and it's not just my lack of enthusiasm for it. The problem lies in that number that determines my worth as a student (or worthlessness, if you decide to round down).
GPAs are silly. I mean, think about it-how meaningful is a number that averages the grades you get for multivariable calculus and acrylic painting? What exactly does a 3.5 GPA mean? Is the missing half-point a mathematical representation of my inability to attain academic perfection, if such a thing exists?
GPAs are used in ranking and applications to compare students by seemingly objective means. But how can individual students' grades be objective when so many biased factors come into play? Grading style, learning environment, teacher proficiency-the list goes on. We have assessment tests like the SAT to compare students' academic standing on a standardized, unbiased basis (or at least as close as we can come to it). There is really no unbiased way to compare students' intelligence other than on basic skills like math and reading, because there is no overlying rubric to judge all people on the many complex layers constituting their individual strengths.
Complete academic success is only possible with a specific personality type that thrives in this particular academic system. In the real world, one's success and intelligence are determined by many other factors that don't fall into the narrow means of assessment used in schools. Number grades should be limited to standardized tests and unbiased material-that is, material as straightforward and unbiased as math problems. Everything else that has room for interpretation should be treated and interpreted as such. If all "good" writing in society was judged by a single rubric pushed by English teachers, some of our most brilliant and creative minds would never have made it in the world of literature-e. e. cummings, anyone?
The abbreviated abomination makes me grit my teeth at the thought of it and roll my eyes at its mention. My parents think I'm just another whiney youngun' blaming the system for not catering to my laziness, but I know better. There is a problem with our academic system, and it's not just my lack of enthusiasm for it. The problem lies in that number that determines my worth as a student (or worthlessness, if you decide to round down).
GPAs are silly. I mean, think about it-how meaningful is a number that averages the grades you get for multivariable calculus and acrylic painting? What exactly does a 3.5 GPA mean? Is the missing half-point a mathematical representation of my inability to attain academic perfection, if such a thing exists?
GPAs are used in ranking and applications to compare students by seemingly objective means. But how can individual students' grades be objective when so many biased factors come into play? Grading style, learning environment, teacher proficiency-the list goes on. We have assessment tests like the SAT to compare students' academic standing on a standardized, unbiased basis (or at least as close as we can come to it). There is really no unbiased way to compare students' intelligence other than on basic skills like math and reading, because there is no overlying rubric to judge all people on the many complex layers constituting their individual strengths.
Complete academic success is only possible with a specific personality type that thrives in this particular academic system. In the real world, one's success and intelligence are determined by many other factors that don't fall into the narrow means of assessment used in schools. Number grades should be limited to standardized tests and unbiased material-that is, material as straightforward and unbiased as math problems. Everything else that has room for interpretation should be treated and interpreted as such. If all "good" writing in society was judged by a single rubric pushed by English teachers, some of our most brilliant and creative minds would never have made it in the world of literature-e. e. cummings, anyone?
Be the first to comment on this story