Strike four! Do‐over policies institutionalize GPA distortion
| Published date | 25 January 2013 |
| Date | 25 January 2013 |
| Pages | 39-53 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881311293052 |
| Author | Jonathan Marx,David Meeler |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Strike four! Do-over policies
institutionalize GPA distortion
Jonathan Marx
Sociology and Anthropology Department, Winthrop University, Rock Hill,
South Carolina, USA, and
David Meeler
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Winthrop University,
Rock Hill, South Carolina, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to illustrate how universities play an institutional role in inflating
student grade point averages (GPA) by modifying academic polices such as course withdraw, repeats,
and satisfactory/unsatisfactory grade options.
Design/methodology/approach – Three research strategies are employed: an examination of eight
public institutions in a southern state illustrates the variability in academic policies; a transcript
analysis demonstrates how students at some universities can capitalize on academic regulations to
inflate GPA; and an empirical analysis of 1,798 graduating seniors at one institution explores the
parameters of utilizing “do-over” policies and how the policies correlate with GPA inflation.
Findings – Schools are transforming the “rules” of the academic game. Such changes enable students
to selectively inflate their GPA, thereby rendering effective comparison of GPA problematic. This is of
particular significance to administrators, governing and accrediting bodies, potential employers,
graduate or professional school recruiters, and policy makers.
Research limitations/implications – This study is cross-sectional and the sample is restricted to
one state and in some analyses one institution. Longitudinal research exploring a larger number of
universities in a variety of states is necessary to uncover the determinants of any changes in academic
policies.
Originality/value – The paper reframes grade inflation as GPA inflation, which is partially a
function of institutionalized processes, and offers a remedy to the problem of GPA comparison. A new
simple metric (EAR) is offered to accompany GPA; only when considering earned hours versus
attempted hours (EAR) does grade point regain some utility to educators, recruiters, or policy makers
engaged in assessment.
Keywords Accountability,Grade inflation, Assessment,Registration policy, Educationalpolicy,
Academic forgiveness, Formula funding,Retention, Academic success, Universities
Paper type Case study
What is the real meaning of a college student’s grade point average (GPA)? What
utility does the measure have in differentiating between two students’ academic
performances at different colleges, or the same college, or even the same program at the
same college? While one might expect GPAs from different programs and different
schools to reflect performance differently, we argue for a more unexpected result. We
argue that even at the same school with the same curriculum and the same instructors,
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
The opinions and perspectives expressed in this piece are the authors solely and are not
necessarily shared by host institution or state.
Strike four!
Do-over policies
39
Received 9 May 2012
Revised 18 September 2012
Accepted 5 October 2012
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 21 No. 1, 2013
pp. 39-53
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684881311293052
To continue reading
Request your trial