Almost half of all grades given since the lifting of the no-fail policy were “1.00” and “1.25,” according to data obtained by the Collegian.

This was the case for both the first and second semesters of academic year (AY) 2022-2023 and the first semester of AY 2023-2024. But the percentage of 1.00s slightly decreased over time (see sidebar 1).

The data, obtained from the UP Diliman Office of the University Registrar-Academic Information System Section, is only limited to grades given after the lifting of the pandemic-era no-fail policy in the first semester of 2022. The dataset represents all the numerical grades given across all courses to students who received a final numerical grade, or over 300,000 data points, spanning three semesters (see sidebar 2).

Through the Years

While some may see this data as an indication that grade inflation—the increase in the average grade given to students over time—exists, the connection remains nebulous, especially since no pre-pandemic data is available.

A university-funded study spearheaded by former UP Diliman Registrar Marilyn Canta attempted to examine the phenomenon before, but Canta told the Collegian that the results cannot be released in full due to uncompleted revisions.

Still, discussing grade distribution and how it relates to the various teaching modalities remains relevant in taking stock of the current situation of UP pedagogy and student progress.

The greatest change was seen during the pandemic, with an example being the replacement of objective-type, face-to-face assessments with asynchronous ones. The question is whether these assessments and teaching styles have stuck after the pandemic and whether they had any effect on the grades given to students. 

A University of Washington study found that there was a permanent bump to student grades post-pandemic, but the same result is hard to conclude for UP without a more thorough study. 

Existing data show that the number of 1.00s from the first and second semesters of AY 2022-2023 and the first semester of AY 2023-2024 did not increase when looking at the number of 1.00s given per academic cluster (see sidebar 2).

The Human Factor

Instead of looking at the number of 1.00s given, some have pointed to the ballooning number of students that have received Latin honors in recent years—67 percent of the entire class of 2023—as indicative of an outdated grading system.

Talk of the increased number of graduates with Latin honors is not just born out of a desire to keep the group limited and prestigious. Some say that practical considerations apply, too. In Yale, for example, critics ask if employers should even look at grades at all if students from a batch are all considered “excellent.”

Such discourse, however, places too much emphasis on grades or laurels as the sole measure of a student’s knowledge, according to Jewel Politico, Education and Research head of the University Student Council.

”Numerical grades are computed according to a set of criteria, a desired standard that doesn’t fully capture the circumstances that the students have to face in order to attain that grade. Not everything can be quantified, and to essentialize everything that can be quantified is an injustice to the materiality of the experiences of students,” he said.

The numerical grade system only increases academic pressure, said Politico. The cycle repeats, leading to worse academic performance with students being graded lower than their actual understanding of the material.

This has tangible effects, especially on university services. UPD PsycServ, which provides psychological services to students, is still overwhelmed with students availing of the service. These students usually cite academic anxiety as their reason for asking for help, according to a 2020 report by Tinig ng Plaridel.

An Outdated System?

Some see the negative effects of the numerical grading system as proof that it needs to be replaced.

“My radical solution would be to do away with grades, period. In the sense that if we want students to learn, then they will be evaluated on the basis of their output,” journalism professor Danilo Arao told the Collegian. “Of course, the option to fail is there, but if you pass, you pass. If you fail, you fail.”

Arao, who infamously raised on social media the phenomenon of “grade hyperinflation,” is suggesting a pass-or-fail grade system—a system that has been proposed in some educational institutions around the world as an alternative to the numeric grading system.

The university employs this system for thesis subjects. Critics of the scheme, however, say that this option does not give students enough feedback and hurts their future employability. And students sometimes emphasize their numeric grades themselves.

“[There are] even corporations expecting that those who apply to their companies would be honor graduates. That’s also the aspect that we need to look at because we cannot just blame students for being too grade-conscious for comfort,” said Arao.

Aside from the grading system, other changes to learning that stuck during the pandemic, such as hybrid learning, were heralded by UP President Angelo Jimenez in his vision paper as part of “pedagogy in this new age.” And open distance learning is at the forefront of his strategic plan to pursue academic excellence at the university. 

But while there are discussions within the administration about changes to the grading system, Arao said that these have not resulted in anything concrete. For now, concerns about the efficacy of numerical grades and the number of 1.00s given are on the back burner—students and professors will still have to stick to the old system. ●

This news has since been updated.