On Sunday, the Editorial Board wrote an editorial encouraging the University to adopt measures relating to the current pass/D/fail policy. While I don’t believe that the measures promoted by the Board are necessarily the best solution to the issue, I believe that the University’s P/D/F policy for undergraduates needs to change in order for the University to truly promote its ideals as a center of liberal arts education and an institution of scholarly exploration.
While “P/D/F”-ing a class is a great option for those who wish to explore a field but fear that a bad grade might hurt their future goals, it also leads to a very common narrative: students are often no longer incentivized to engage in the class.
Most students recognize the significant difference between the effort required to pass a course and the effort required to get a good grade. The question of whether or not one will P/D/F a class becomes a strategic one: students often find that P/D/F-ing a class will enable them to focus on and perform better in their other classes. While ideally students would continue to put effort into their P/D/F class (and their intention may be to do so), due to the pressures of other classes, P/D/F classes often take a backseat.
Having the P/D/F deadline midway through the semester means that students are participating minimally in a class for almost half a semester, as once they declare P/D/F, they resign themselves to the least amount of work required to pass a class. This is harmful for everybody participating in the class with them: students, instructors and preceptors. In fact, there is vast literature (An Evaluation of Pass/Fail in Princeton and A National Evalution of Pass/Fail) in post-secondary pedagogy documenting the large drop in performance and change in attitudes due to the P/D/F option.
Further, students may find that they are performing better than they expected. Some classes consider only one piece of assessment for the reported midterm grades, which is not indicative of the student’s final performance in the class. Often, students find that they are P/D/F-ing a class they enjoy and could do well in, but are not receiving due credit for any additional effort beyond the minimal.
I believe that it is imperative that the administration reconsider its P/D/F policy after collection of student and faculty feedback. I have outlined a few of the possible changes (extending upon those proposed by the Editorial Board), but hope that they are criticized and developed upon, and that other modifications emerge and are considered.
One modification that would likely be met with positive feedback by students would be to push the deadline for electing the P/D/F option until later in the semester, for example allowing for electing a P/D/F grade after receiving the final grade, as proposed by the Editorial Board. This will ensure incentive to engage in the class throughout, but may pose its own problems. Other possible deadlines include after the final exam but before receiving a grade, after the last week of classes and possibly even course-specific P/D/F deadlines decided on by the instructor. Variations of these deadlines exist in universities across the country and around the world, and often act as fail-safes in case the student finds that they were not able to perform adequately in a class due to illness or other circumstances.
Many may argue that having the deadline after receiving the grade would make the Pass grade equivalent to a C, but isn’t that already the case? Undergraduates currently P/D/F a class because they believe it would significantly lower their GPA. Students would still not be able to PDF most classes, and most importantly all departmental requirements. Thus, the GPA would still be relevant, but the hope of a good grade would incentivise further exploration.
Another modification, albeit an unpopular one, would be to make the requirements to pass a course more stringent. Currently, according to the University’s grading policy, a pass grade reflects that the final work is at least “acceptable, while falling short of meeting basic standards in several ways.” The requirements could be raised so that the work reflects a higher standard of learning, which would force a student to engage in the class more. However, this could dissuade students from exploring and tighten the spectrum of grades, and thus increase competition. I’m no proponent for fear as a motivator (despite its pedagogical benefits), but I recognize the benefits this alternative modification could present.
As a proponent of the liberal arts curriculum, the University should reflect on the practicality of the P/D/F option and gather relevant feedback from all members of the community. While no particular modifications seem obvious, the University must not believe that the policy as it is now is successful in encouraging scholarly exploration in diverse fields.
Avaneesh Narla is a sophomore from Calcutta, India. He can be reached at avaneesh.narla@princeton.edu.
Correction: Due to a reporting error, an earlier version of this article incorrectly referred to Avaneesh Narla '17 as a freshman instead of a sophomore. The ‘Prince’ regrets the error.
Read More
Progressives failed a lesson in free speech
Anais Mobarak“The recent controversy surrounding Charter Club has demonstrated that progressive voices on campus have failed to recognize the value of free speech beyond its usefulness as a political instrument. Thus, as a community, we must work to foster an ideologically-free understanding of free speech.”
“The recent controversy surrounding Charter Club has demonstrated that progressive voices on campus have failed to recognize the value of free speech beyond its usefulness as a political instrument. Thus, as a community, we must work to foster an ideologically-free understanding of free speech.”
Campus through a lens: Announcing the ‘Prince’s inaugural columnists
Eleanor Clemans-CopeReading a series of columns by the same author is seeing things through the writer’s lens — it’s looking at campus through the ‘Christofer glasses’ or the ‘Eleanor specs.’ This is the thinking behind having named columns.
Reading a series of columns by the same author is seeing things through the writer’s lens — it’s looking at campus through the ‘Christofer glasses’ or the ‘Eleanor specs.’ This is the thinking behind having named columns.
Bring back the course packet
Abigail Rabieh“With the recent news that Labyrinth Books will no longer supply the coursebooks for Princeton classes, we are facing a new era in which all readings will only be accessible by some digital medium, whether that be via Course Reserves or online ordering from faraway publishers. While some may see this as a step in the right direction of modernity, the increasing digitalization of our scholarship hurts our learning.”
“With the recent news that Labyrinth Books will no longer supply the coursebooks for Princeton classes, we are facing a new era in which all readings will only be accessible by some digital medium, whether that be via Course Reserves or online ordering from faraway publishers. While some may see this as a step in the right direction of modernity, the increasing digitalization of our scholarship hurts our learning.”
