As the graduation season has approached the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cohort, the Korea University Graduate School of Law has reduced the significance of undergraduate grades in their 2024 admissions evaluation criteria. Grade inflation is a sensitive issue as it directly influences students’ job prospects and chances of admission to graduate schools. Therefore, the Sungkyun Times (SKT) aims to explore the issues surrounding grade inflation.
Caught in the GPA Balloon
-What Is Grade Inflation?
Grade inflation occurs when a higher proportion of university students receive high grades, ultimately diminishing the overall value of the grades. This phenomenon has been notably exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. During this period, many universities transitioned from a relative grading system to an absolute grading system due to the prevalence of remote learning. Unlike the competitive nature of relative grading, the absolute grading system sets clear score thresholds for achieving favorable results, enabling more students to achieve high grades. According to the Korean Council for University Education, the proportion of university students receiving an A in their courses surged to 54.7% in 2020, a significant increase from 33.7% in 2019. As the pandemic gradually ended, universities reverted to the relative grading system, making it more challenging for students to attain high grades compared to the pandemic period. However, the propensity to grant relatively high grades persisted, influenced by recent grading trends and student course evaluations.
-Unveiling the Current Landscape of Grade Inflation
Grade inflation is a widespread issue across Korean universities, albeit with varying grading policies among institutions. Notably, four-year universities in Seoul City were known for their lenient grading practices. This trend was highlighted in the second semester of 2022, which enforced absolute evaluation due to the pandemic. According to data from the Ministry of Education (MOE), the top five universities with the highest percentage of students receiving high grades from this period were Ewha Womans University, Seoul National University, Korea University, Yonsei University, and Sungkyunkwan University (SKKU). Surprisingly, approximately 60% of students at these universities received an A in their major courses. Conversely, many universities in provincial areas tended to adopt more conservative grading policies. For example, Woosuk University and Honam University upheld strict grading standards, with only 26- 29% of students receiving an A in their major courses. The disparity in grading practices was partly attributed to the varying impact of government policies on each university. In 2014, the MOE introduced the appropriateness of a grade distribution indicator in university evaluations to curb grade inflation. However, regional private universities, particularly those with less financial stability than their Seoul City counterparts, were more responsive to government evaluations and actively embraced relative grading.
A Balloon Ready to Burst
-Aggravating Burdens of the Students
Grade inflation poses a significant challenge, particularly in ensuring fairness in grading among students. The issue arises from disparities in how students were affected by the absolute grading system during the pandemic, leading to differences in their grades. Consequently, debates on fairness have surged, especially among students who did not benefit from the absolute grading system. This group includes pre-pandemic enrollees, those who paused studies for military service during the pandemic, and students from institutions with rigorous evaluation standards throughout. One of the primary areas where this unfairness becomes evident is in employment and graduate school admissions. Discontent among students is mounting as those who received high grades during the pandemic are graduating and entering the fiercely competitive job market and the realms of graduate school admissions. There is a growing concern that those who received higher grades during the pandemic may enjoy an unfair advantage in these competitive arenas, particularly given the challenging job-seeking landscape. In an interview with SKT, Kim Jeong-woo (Junior, Department of Business Administration, Chung-Ang University) expressed his disappointment, stating, “I am dismayed by the significant drop in my grade average compared to my peers after returning from military service during COVID-19. I am worried this might set me back in my job search.” In areas such as law school admissions, where grades wield considerable influence in shaping outcomes via quantitative assessments, the tangible effects of grade inflation are keenly felt. The saturation of applicants boasting stellar grades and the thin margin between acceptance and rejection highlight the direct consequences of inflation.
-Swelling Challenges in Applicant Evaluation
Evaluation agencies, such as companies’ human resources teams and graduate school admissions offices, are grappling with significant challenges in assessing applicants due to grade inflation. This inflation undermines the reliability and discriminative value of grades as an assessment criterion, which has traditionally been a crucial metric for evaluating applicants. According to a survey conducted in May 2023 by Job Korea, an online recruiting company, school grades were unanimously cited as a critical factor in applicant evaluations among corporate human resources team managers. This significance is amplified in graduate school admissions, where grades are pivotal in quantitative assessments. However, the surge in student grades has diminished their effectiveness in distinguishing between applicants, making the selection process more complex. Compounding this issue is the divergence in grades between applicants from pre-pandemic and pandemic-era enrollment periods. This gap raises concerns about the fairness of grades representing applicants’ qualitative attributes.
Navigating Solutions for Grade Inflation
-Enforcing Stringent Guidelines
Immediate action is required given the nationwide prevalence of the fundamental issues of persisting grade inflation, including ongoing oversight from the MOE. By learning from the ineffective policies identified in the 2014 evaluation structural reforms, it is imperative to refine the specifics of incentives to tackle grade inflation across all universities, regardless of their affiliation or location. In addition, universities must take proactive steps toward combating grade inflation. They should initiate gradual reforms within each institution and build upon these efforts to achieve a lasting impact. One effective strategy is enhancing evaluation through increased involvement of professors. Departments should foster open discussions among faculty members to ensure fair evaluations. This strategy has been proven effective through established discussion platforms at Princeton University and Louisiana State University since the early 2000s. Moreover, implementing systems for comparing evaluation standards among professors can aid in standardizing grades. Examples from renowned universities such as Harvard and Duke, where grade distribution data within departments are shared among professors each semester, demonstrate the potential to mitigate grade inflation trends. Since grade inflation directly impacts students, their input is also invaluable. Establishing regular forums with student representatives will foster meaningful dialogue and ensure the consideration of student perspectives.
-Evaluating Applicants Holistically beyond Grades
The guidance from the government and the proactive efforts of universities are crucial in gradually tackling grade inflation, but they cannot single-handedly resolve the widespread issue. Alongside these initiatives, there is an urgent need for evaluation agencies to revamp their methods. This entails shifting toward a more comprehensive evaluation approach that utilizes other factors beyond mere grades. While current assessments do consider various factors, they must lessen the persistent reliance on grades stemming from their perceived objectivity. Hence, it is imperative to transition away from this grade-centric model toward a qualitative evaluation system that considers elements such as extracurricular involvement, certifications, practical experiences, and interviews. This shift is especially vital in graduate school admissions offices, where quantitative metrics often dominate. One graduate admissions officer at SKKU told the SKT, “We are committed to adopting methods that better encompass the diverse qualities of applicants, moving beyond grades alone.” This evolution in evaluation methodology would to incentivize students to engage in activities that enhance their practical skills. For instance, it would prevent, students from opting out of pursuing courses aligned with their interests out of fear of receiving low grades. This new evaluation method could empower students to explore their passions freely, fostering a more diverse range of experiences conducive to their future careers.
Grades have the appeal of clearly indicating distinctions through numbers. Consequently, students rely on grades to objectively validate their accomplishments. However, it is worth contemplating whether grades truly serve as accurate indicators of students’ diligence and efforts in today’s landscape. Effective resolution of this issue is imperative to prevent students’ endeavors from being in vain. It is hoped that Kingos will also take a keen interest in this issue and keep a watchful eye.