The Martin J. Whitman School of Management developed a policy that is unlike any other college at Syracuse University. According to the syllabus for my accounting class, the policy is as follows: “For all undergraduate courses taken at the Whitman School with 25 or more students enrolled, the mean grade shall be no higher than 3.3 and the maximum percentage of A/A- is 33%, per a Whitman course syllabus.”

This policy seems to have three goals: to ensure that grading is fair and consistent across courses, to encourage students to take their coursework seriously and to ensure the program delivers a challenging academic experience.

But many students have expressed their frustrations with the curve, saying that it supports and encourages cheating, and while cheating will be present regardless, it’s especially so when students are competing for the top 33%. Additionally, with a focus more on grades than concept retention, many students don’t put in much effort into learning the material or trying to get a good grade if they think they will not receive it.

“In reality it’s making students discouraged, I think, into trying,” said Kristen Wohrle, a freshman international relations major who takes classes at Whitman. “Why try for an A, when you could deserve the grade but since too many students got an A, you can’t get it.”

Nathan Hirschberg, a Whitman student, even started a petition two years ago to abolish the Whitman curve. Within the petition, he wrote that there are many issues with this policy.

“In my Principles of Finance class, I received a 94.78%, which was curved down to a B+,” Hirschberg wrote. “This is not a reflection on my professor’s grading policy; rather he was forced to abide by the Whitman Grading Policy.”

The Whitman grading policy is unnecessary and complicated, encouraging students to focus on grades and competition more than learning the material and comprehending the concepts taught in the classes. A similar policy was introduced at Princeton University, but the ivy league school discontinued the curve in 2014 because it “failed,” Forbes said.

Sebastian Talib, a freshman marketing major in the Whitman school said that the American education system creates an environment where some very intellectual students have just average GPAs.

“I do know many students that don’t show up to class or don’t put in the right amount of effort into their classes because they know that the professor will curve their grade at the end of the semester,” Talib said.

Such a competitive grading policy should not be implemented at SU, as it creates a dangerous and unhealthy work environment for students. It supports a “put your head down and work” attitude, and as a result, Whitman students are less inclined to help and collaborate with classmates. They are missing out on chances to better solidify the knowledge and ideas taught in class.

The policy doesn’t set students up to think critically and practically, and it discourages students to work together. It makes sense why a student wouldn’t want to collaborate with other classmates — they may be hesitant to help their peers if that gives them less of a chance of earning an A grade. The system needs changing.

The grading policy is extremely unnecessary and counterproductive. The curve doesn’t help anyone more than the traditional grading system. I don’t think it can be argued that there are more flaws in the traditional grading system (you get a 95 and your grade is a 95) as opposed to this new grading system imposed by Whitman. And with final grades coming up, certainly there is trepidation amongst many Whitman students.

SU should adopt a fairer grading policy — just like the rest of the SU colleges — to allow students to get the grade they earn and deserve so they focus on course material. The grading system was never broken, and it did not need to be “fixed.”

Aiden Walsh is a freshman finance major. His column appears biweekly. He can be reached at [email protected].

Published on April 19, 2022 at 9:44 pm