In this memo Omega University''s
dean points out that Omega
graduates are less successfulin getting
jobs thanAlpha University graduates, despite the fact that during thepast 15 years the overall
grade average of Omega students has risen by 30%.The deanalso points out that during the past 15 years Omega has encouraged its students, by wayof a particular procedure, to evaluate the effectiveness of their professors.The deanreasons that this
procedure explains the gmde-average increase, which in turn has createda perception among employers that Omega graduates are less qualified for jobs.On the basis of this line of reasoning the dean concludes that to enable Omega graduatesto find better jobs Omega must terminate its professorevaluation procedure.Thisargument contains several logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.A threshold problem with the argument involves the voluntary nature of theevaluation procedure.The dean provides no evidence about the number or percentageof Omega students who participate in the procedure. Lacking such evidence it isentirely possible that those numbers are insignificant, in which case terminating theprocedure is unlikely to have any effect on the grade average of Omega students ortheir success in getting jobs after graduation.The argument also assumes unfairly that the grade-average
increase is the resultof the
evaluation procedure-rather than some other phenomenon.The dean ignoresa host of other possible explanations for the increase-such as a trend at Omegatoward higher admission standards, or higher quality instruction or faci1ities.Withoutruling out all other possible explanations for the grade-average increase, the deancannot convince me that by terminating the evaluation procedure Omega wouldcurb its perceived grade inflation-let alone help its graduates get jobs.Even if the evaluation procedure has resulted in grade inflation at Omega, thedean''s claim that grade inflation explains why Omega graduates are less successfulthan Alpha graduates in getting jobs is unjustified.The dean overlooks a myriad ofother possible reasons for Omega''s comparatively poor job-placement record. PerhapsOmega''s career services are inadequate; or perhaps Omega''s curriculum doesnot prepare students for the job market as effectively as Alpha''s. In short, withoutaccounting for other factors that might contribute to Omega graduates'' comparativelack of success in getting jobs, the dean cannot justify the claim that if Omega curbsits grade inflation employers will be more likely to hire Omega graduates.Finally,even if the dean can substantiate all of the foregoing assumptions, the dean''sassertion that Omega must terminate its evaluation procedure to enable its graduates tofind better jobs is still unwarranted, in two respects. First, the dean ignores other possible ways by which Omega can increase its job-placement record-for example, byimproving its public relations or careercounseling services. Second, the dean unfairlyequates "more" jobs with "better" jobs. In other words, even if more Omega graduatesare able to find jobs as a result of the dean''s recommended course of action, the kindsof jobs Omega graduates find would not necessarily be better ones.In sum, the dean''s argument is unpersuasive as it stands.To strengthen it the deanmust provide better evidence that the increase in grade average is attributable toOmega''s professor-evaluation procedure, and that the end result is a perception onthe part of employers that Omega graduates are less qualified for jobs than Alphagraduates.To better assess the argument I would need to analyze 15-year trends in (1)the percentage of Omega students participating in the evaluation procedure, (2)Omega''s admission standards and quality of education, and (3) Omega''s emphasis onjob training and career preparation. I would also need to know what other means areavailable to Omega for enabling its graduates to frnd better jobs.
More abstracts about the Grade inflation at Omega University