Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Do Differential Grading Standards Across Fields Matter for Major Choice? Evidence from a Policy Change in Florida

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Grading standards in college vary substantially across fields, especially among STEM fields that tend to give lower grades than non-STEM fields. Prior research has demonstrated that grades affect course and major choices, but less is known about how policies oriented to reduce differences in grading standards across fields affect persistence and completion in the major of choice. Using administrative data from the Florida Department of Education, this paper examines the effect of changing the grading scale from whole-letter grades to plus/minus grades on STEM major choice. It relies on a difference-in-difference framework that compares students’ outcomes before and after a grade policy change at two institutions to similar students at other institutions over the same time period. I find that a change in the grading scale significantly reduces grading differentials across fields and increases the likelihood of students graduating with a STEM degree. Although results should be interpreted cautiously given the limitations of the data, they represent the first direct, quasi-experimental evidence regarding the effect of a grade scale change on STEM major choice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source Florida Board of Governors State University System. Degrees Awarded by State University System Institutions since 1991. Retrieved December 13, 2015, from https://www.flbog.edu/resources/iud/degrees_results.php

Fig. 2

Source Author using student-transcript-level data from the Florida Department of Education. Note: This figure displays percentages of whole and plus/minus grades in lower-and-upper-division courses during the Fall 1996 and Spring 1997, before the change in the grading scale, and the Fall 2000/03 and Spring 2000/03, after the grading policy was in effect

Fig. 3

Source Author using student-transcript-level data from the Florida Department of Education. Note: These figures display the share if student-course observations that were assigned a letter grade before and after the change in the grading scale by treatment status. Grades for all lower-division courses, and STEM and non-STEM lower-division courses are taken during the 1st year of enrollment. The percentage of whole and plus/minus grades are stacked in the graph

Fig. 4

Source Author using student-transcript-level data from the Florida Department of Education. Note: The figure displays average STEM and Non-STEM grades in lower-division courses during Fall 1996 and Spring 1997, before the change in the grading scale, and Fall 2000/03 and Spring 2000/03, after the grading policy was in effect

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altonji, J. G., Blom, E., & Meghir, C. (2012). Heterogeneity in human capital investments: High school curriculum, college major, and careers. Annual Review of Economics, 4, 185–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altonji, J. G., Kahn, L. B., & Speer, J. D. (2014). Trends in earnings differentials across college majors and the changing task composition of jobs. American Economic Review, American Economic Association, 104(5), 387–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. L., & Kim, D. (2006). Increasing the success of minority students in science and technology. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arcidiacono, P., Ahn, T., Hopson, A., & Thomas, J. (2019). Equilibrium grade inflation with implications for female interest in STEM majors.NBER Working Paper No. 26556. Cambridge, MA: NBER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arcidiacono, P., Aucejo, E., Fang, H., & Spenner, K. (2011). What happens after enrollment? An analysis of the time path of racial difference in GPA and major choice. Quantitative Economics, 2(3), 303–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attewell, P., Heil, S., & Reisel, L. (2011). Competing explanations of undergraduate noncompletion. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 536–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar, T., Kadiyali, V., & Zussman, A. (2009). Grade information and grade inflation: The Cornell experiment. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(3), 93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, K. D., & Buring, S. M. (2012). The effect of various grading scales on student grade point averages. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe76341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, L. L. B., Bull, K. S., Campbell, N. J., & Perry, K. M. (2001). Effects of academic discipline and teaching goals in predicting grading beliefs among undergraduate teaching faculty. Research in Higher Education, 42(4), 455–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida Board of Governors State University System. Degrees awarded by State University System Institutions since 1991. Retrieved December 13, 2015, from https://www.flbog.edu/resources/iud/degrees_results.php.

  • Bressette, A. (2002). Arguments for plus/minus grading: A case study. Educational Research Quarterly, 25(3), 29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C., & Corcoran, M. (1996). Sex-based differences in school content and the male/female wage gap. NBER Working Paper No. 5580. 

  • Brumfield, C. (2005). Current trends in grades and grading practices in higher education: Results of the 2004 AACRAO survey. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, K. F., McEwan, P. J., & Weerapana, A. (2014). The effects of an anti-grade-inflation policy at Wellesley College. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(3), 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, A. C., Gelbach, J. B., & Miller, D. L. (2008). Bootstrap-based improvements for inference with clustered errors. Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(3), 414–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Card, D., & Payne, A. (2017). High school choice and gender gap in STEM. NBER Working Paper 23769.

  • Carrell, S. E., Page, M. E., & James, E. W. (2010). Sex and science: How professor gender perpetuates the gender gap. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(3), 1101–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, G., Nora, A., & Taggart, A. (2009). Student characteristics, pre-college, college, and environmental factors as predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: An analysis of students attending a Hispanic Serving Institution. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 924–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farland, R., & Cepeda, R. (1989). Plus and minus grading. (Report No. ED 309 802). Sacramento: Prepared as Agenda Item Number 9 at a meeting of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, September 14–15. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. JC 890 370).

  • Gerber, T. P., & Cheung, S. Y. (2008). Horizontal stratification in postsecondary education: Forms, explanations, and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 34(1), 299–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorry, D. (2017). The impact of grade ceilings on student grades and course evaluations: Evidence from a policy change. Economics of Education Review, 56, 133–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, A. L. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 911–922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, G., Taddese, N., & Walter, E. (2000). Entry and persistence of women and minorities in college science and engineering education. Education Statistics Quarterly, 2(3), 59–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, L., & Mokher, C. (2009). Pathways to boosting the earnings of low-income students by increasing their educational attainment. Prepared for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation by the Hudson Institute Center for Employment Policy and CNA Analysis & Solutions, January 2009.

  • Johnson, V. E. (2003). Grade inflation: a crisis in college education. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kokkelenberg, E. C., & Sinha, E. (2010). Who succeeds in STEM studies? An analysis of Binghamton University undergraduate students. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 935–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). 2011. Postsecondary awards in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), by state: 2001 and 2009. Retrieved April 30, 2010, from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2011226.

  • Ost, B. (2010). The role of peers and grades in determining major persistence in the sciences. Economics of Education Review, 29, 923–934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, C., & Serra, D. (2020). Gender differences in the choice of major: The importance of female role models. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 12(3), 226–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. (2010). The effect of instructor race and gender on student persistence in STEM fields. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 901–910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.07.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Princeton University. (2014). Report from the Ad Hoc Committee to review policies regarding assessment and grading. Retrieved November 26, 2015, from https://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S40/73/33I92/PU_Grading_Policy_Report_2014_Aug.pdf.

  • Quann, C. J. (1987). Plus–minus grading: A case study and national implications (pp. 1–17). Washington, D.C.: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rask, K. (2010). Attrition in STEM fields at a liberal arts college: The importance of grades and pre-collegiate preferences. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 892–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rask, K. N., & Bailey, E. M. (2002). Are faculty role models? Evidence from major choice in an undergraduate institution. The Journal of Economic Education, 33(2), 99–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rask, K., & Tiefenthaler, J. (2008). The role of grade sensitivity in explaining the gender imbalance in undergraduate economics. Economics of Education Review, 27(6), 676–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley, H. J., Checca, R. C., Singer, T. S., Worthington, D. F. (1994). Current trends in grades and grading practices in undergraduate higher education. The Results of the 1992 AACRAO Survey. New York: 1–76.

  • Rodriguez, S. L., Lu, C., & Bartlett, M. (2018). Engineering identity development: A review of the higher education literature. International Journal of Education in Mathematics Science and Technology (IJEMST), 6(3), 254–265. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.428182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rojstaczer, S., & Healy, C. (2010). Grading in American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved November 26, 2014, from https://www.gradeinflation.com/tcr2010grading.pdf.

  • Sabot, R., & Wakeman-Linn, J. (1991). Grade inflation and course choice. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, J. L. (1979). High school grades—How fair are plus and minus suffixes? Education, 100(2), 153–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, E. J., & Barbuti, S. (2010). Patterns of persistence in intended college major with a focus on STEM majors. NACADA Journal, 30(2), 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinebrickner, T. R., & Stinebrickner, R. (2009). Learning about academic ability and the college drop-out decision. NBER Working Paper 14810.

  • Stinebrickner, T. R., & Stinebrickner, R. (2011). Math or science? Using longitudinal expectations data to examine the process of choosing a college major. NBER Working Paper 16869. 

  • Thomas, G. E. (1985). College major and career inequality: Implications for black students. The Journal of Negro Education, 54(4), 537–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges the Florida Department of Education for providing access to the restricted data utilized herein. The author thanks Judith Scott-Clayton, Peter Bergman, Randall Reback and Jonah Rockoff for their feedback on early drafts. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent views of the Florida Department of Education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 W. 120th Street, Box 174, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Veronica Minaya

Authors
  1. Veronica Minaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veronica Minaya.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 94 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Minaya, V. Do Differential Grading Standards Across Fields Matter for Major Choice? Evidence from a Policy Change in Florida. Res High Educ 61, 943–965 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-020-09606-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-020-09606-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation