Dear students,
This is Dean Ryan Pekson of the College of Pharmacy. There has been enough said about the new grading system. It even reached the point where a hate-campaign was formed against the College of Pharmacy, with the notion that this grading policy was single handedly crafted by yours truly. Please allow me to answer the issues that were raised by those who are against this, in the hope that this will shed some light on these things.
Let me start by stating the basis for the “0-based” grading. The Old grading system imposes a minimum grade of 65% even if the student misses a quiz, an exam, or any requirement for that matter. This means that as long as the student is attending class and has not dropped, even if he/she gets nothing for any course requirement, the faculty is obliged to give a grade of 65% as the minimum. Where is the logic and fairness in this system? If a student took the exam and he/she gets only 30% it will be automatically converted to 65%. Does this mean that it is just fair for a student who got nothing to be given a grade equal to those who really got 65% or those who did not even bothered taking the exam at all? Where is the logic and fairness here? Why should there be an automatic grade of 50% or 60% even if there’s no evidence of performance to be given such? What is proposed in the new grading system is that grades should be reported to be reflective of the TRUE performance of the students and NOT a sugar-coated value to have the wrong impression that you have accomplished something even if the truth is there’s none. The new grading system is not a 0-based grading system. It is a PERFORMANCE-based grading system.
Another issue raised is the 70% cut-off grade to pass. In the old system, 50 or 60 is the passing mark. These values are transmuted to make it appear 75%. Hence, what appears as equivalent of 3.0 in the grade sheet is 75%. Will you be happy now to think that you will earn your diploma even if you only learned half of what was required from you? Transmutation is an obsolete process. Even the DepEd themselves has stopped using this in computing grades in the elementary and high school levels. FEU, MIT, ADMU, UP, and other institutions are not also transmuting grades for a long period of time now. There is no valid basis for transmuting grades.
So why 70%? The purpose of the new grading system is to raise the standards, which of course is aimed towards improving our University’s performance in the board exam. Currently, there are only 52% of the various programs with board exams which is above the national passing. That is with the current grading system, which obviously promotes mediocrity. If we need to improve on this, we need to set the standards higher. Other colleges who have implemented this 70% cut-off grade - way before this new grading system was introduced - are performing very well in their respective board exam. This served as an impetus for the administration to decide on following into their lead.
This new grading system is not an overnight work of a single person. It started back in December of 2008. For almost 2 years the deans, chairs, and other university officials have painstakingly debated on every provision that was made part of this policy. This was presented to the faculty and educational experts for improvements and polishing. Plenty of hours were spent debating and arguing on each provisions, but at the end, the committee has to come up with a consensus. This policy was signed by all the members of the committee who was part in this painstaking process. After which, this was presented to the Academic council for another review. Only then that this can be elevated to the Executive council, before finally, the President has to lay his final verdict and affix his signature on it.
What will be the benefit of the new grading system?
- it raises the standards, so students will be obliged to focus more on their studies
- it will make students proud that they earned their degree from an institution with a high standard of education and not from diploma mill
- it will have 4 major exams (prelim, midterm, pre-final, and final). Studies have shown that if more evaluative measures are given, the more is the chance for a student to pass a course.
- it also introduces a reward system (exemption from the final exam). This will motivate students to get serious in their studies early on. You have now the chance not to take the final exam, unlike before that everyone is obliged to do so.
- it provides more chance of passing by introducing a remedial exam. Before if the average is below 75% you automatically fail the subject. In the new system, if your grade after the final exam is from 65 to less than 70%, you will still be given a final chance (remedial exam) to pass the subject.
- it provides a more realistic range in the grade point equivalent. In the old system, for a student to get flat 1.0 he/she must have a grade of 99-100%. With the new system, to get a flat 1.0 you need to have a grade of 97-100%.
- it gives higher chance for students to vie for honors. With the new system, to graduate with an honor of cum laude will only require a grade of 1.74 or better in contrast to the 1.69 before. And to top this, the lowest allowable grade qualification was also removed. This means that even if you had a grade of 3.0 in any subject, as long as you have not failed any, and you managed to reached the cut-off grade of 1.74, you will still qualify for the honors. This is not true with the old system.
- it provides provision for make-up for missed exam or other course requirements where professors will be obliged to give as long as the reasons are deemed valid.
This is just to name a few…
This new grading was designed to raise the standards of education and to provide students with a fair, honest, and realistic way of evaluating their REAL performance. This whole effort was aimed at producing students who will be proud as an Adamson graduate, and to provide the highest and best education that every parent would wish for their child.
I hope that those individuals who are rallying against the implementation of this policy, because they are concerned about the rigors of the additional work that this will entail on their part for this policy to work, will soon be enlightened and realize what this new system has to offer. I hope you would agree with me that our students deserve more.
Let me end this litany by saying “There’s nothing wrong in aiming high. At least if you don’t make it, you will still find yourself up there…”
P.S.
Please pass this on so that others may see the light in this.
Best regards,
Ryan
Ryan C Pekson, RPh, MSc
Dean, College of Pharmacy
Adamson University
900 San Marcelino Street, Ermita, Manila
Tel No. (632) 524.2011 local 390
Tel/Fax (632) 521.2621
