SEFS faculty acknowledge some limitations in using grades to assess student work and learning. Grades do not completely capture the nuance and complexity of student learning, nor do they always accurately portray the progress and intellectual achievement of students. Nevertheless, grades can be a useful tool for assessment and serve as recognition of academic excellence. We are responsible for using grades in accordance with the University Policy, which identifies grades of 3.9 and 4.0 as “honor” grades.

In the environment where roughly ⅓ of all grades received by current SEFS undergraduates are a 4.0, one can hardly argue that the “honor” standard is being followed on campus. At the same time, the incentives of any individual faculty members (especially junior faculty) are such that a unilateral tightening of grading standards can lead to adverse impact on the instructor without much change in the overall grade inflation picture.

The University Policy states that “Each professor should announce during the first week of any course the nature of the grading practice to be followed, including any components of the course grade other than a final examination grade. Such components may include one or more papers, preliminary examinations, class participation, etc. Precise allocation of course grade to components need not be announced in advance. However, such allocation to the extent possible should be indicated, and each student should have available on request the allocation among all components of any course grade after grading has been completed.”

The University does not offer explicit guidance on how to convert percentage grades to UW 4.0 scale. It is thus up to the faculty to develop these conversions.

SEFS faculty noted that the UW policy does create a correspondence between a letter grade and provides numerical bounds for an A-, B-, etc. A very common expectation across the US is that 90% of course credit corresponds to a low A- (3.5 on UW scale), while lower B- (2.5) corresponds to 80%, etc. Thus, if faculty agree that the lowest possible A- is a 90%, then 90% should reflect the lowest possible numeric score, which is 3.5, and 80% should reflect a 2.5, 75% a 2.0 (an important cutoff for courses to count toward major requirements), 70% a 1.5, and so on.

The Curriculum Committee recommends that under these assumptions, the numeric conversion for SEFS courses, undergraduate and graduate, follow a simple linear relationship between UW numeric grades using the 4.0 scale based on percentage of credit earned in the course.

UW Numeric Grade = 0.1*Percentage Grade (in %) – 5.5

To attain a 4.0 grade a student needs to earn 95% or more of course. The lowest percentage grade to earn undergraduate credit is 62%. The required percentage to earn a 2.0 is 75%. For graduate students, “A minimum of 2.7 shall be required in each graded course which counts toward satisfying graduate degree requirements” which translates to earning 82% of the credit. Additional considerations and the conversion table are below.

We note that this is not a requirement for any individual course but this conversion may be most consistent with the common understanding of “earn at least 90% to get an A-” or “earn at least 75% to use the course toward major requirements”.

At a minimum, we recommend SEFS faculty to be as explicit as possible about all elements of grading in communication with their students, including publishing a percent-UW grade correspondence table/relationship and/or utilizing Canvas’ grade conversion tool.

Grade conversions or scales in and of themselves do not address the issue of grade inflation. The onus is on faculty to design their courses so that achieving a 4.0 reflects true excellence in academic achievement and help maintain the integrity/meaning of a 4.0 (an “honor” of a grade). At the same time we encourage all faculty to carefully craft their assessments so that attaining a 4.0 in their course is indeed possible, provided the students devote an appropriate amount of effort in the environment of inclusive and scaffolded learning. To this end, use of low-stakes assessments, scaffolding from formative to summative assessments, and other appropriate pedagogical techniques are encouraged.

Grade Conversion | Tabular Form

Resources:

We also created an Excel sheet which does the interpolation – please download and use as an Excel file (Google sheets doesn’t quite show it correctly).

Scholastic regulations:

https://www.washington.edu/admin/rules/policies/SGP/ScholRegCH110.html

Registrar:

https://registrar.washington.edu/students/transcripts/legend/

Canvas Tool:

https://itconnect.uw.edu/tools-services-support/teaching-learning/canvas/canvas-help-for-instructors/grading/which-grade-scale-tool/

Linguistics Department:  https://depts.washington.edu/lingta/grade_conversion.pdf

History: 1995 report on grades and grade inflation