HSE Students Are Getting Better Grades

HSE students’ average grades are growing steadily, with the share of ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ reaching nearly 40%. However, apart from students’ higher performance, this may also reflect certain systemic problems. The issue of grade inflation was recently discussed by the Rector’s Council, and the HSE Administration has suggested that faculties and the Student Council work out a joint solution to the problem.

The average grade of all HSE campuses has grown considerably in recent years. It was 6.8 in the 2014—2015 academic year, rising to 7.56 during the first three modules of the current year.

The university administration took note of the trend and examined the situation in greater detail, analysing the distribution of grades. Their analysis was carried out based on almost 900,000 grades given to students since September 1, 2019. Although with such big data the distribution of grades should peak in the middle of the scale, the actual peak appears to be at the top of the grading scale.

Given that the number of students has increased by more than 70% and many new programmes have launched since 2014, this trend is certainly a cause for concern. It is true that the overall quality of admitted students has improved, and many students entering the university have won Olympiads or completed specialized schools; this facilitates their studies at the university. However, more ambitious goals and more demanding requirements can and should be set for brighter students. Both the new programmes and the new teachers at HSE University should be warned against celebrating any early victories.

© Daniil Prokofyev/ HSE University

While not universal, another problem is still quite common. Up to 20% of teachers find it appropriate to give top grades to three-quarters of students, and up to 10% of teachers give ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ to 90% of students. Notably, if translated into the 5-point grading system, this would mean 5+ and 5++ [equivalent to A+ and A++ in the letter grading system]. In fact, exams are becoming pass/fail tests. This suggests weakness in teacher performance and drawbacks of the grading system rather than stronger performance by students.

The university administration believes that grade inflation is a big problem primarily for the top students who invest a great deal of effort in studying a subject that they’re really interested in. If everyone turns out to be ‘A students’, the educational creativity of those students isn’t properly recognized.

Other unpleasant situations occur from time to time. Some teachers tend to inflate grades, which may be interpreted as an attempt to conceal their own lack of commitment to students’ learning and performance or to take the responsibility off their plates. When entering HSE University, students are prepared to work hard and conscientiously, but teachers in some subjects grade them more leniently.   

HSE Rector Yaroslav Kuzminov has requested that all faculties join with the Student Council to analyse the statistics of each educational programme and assess teachers’ grading practices.

He warned the deans and heads of schools and departments against rushing into drastic changes and intervening in the teaching process. Mr. Kuzminov emphasized the need for a detailed and thorough discussion of the problem that takes into account the traditions and specific nature of each department.

Once the relevant data are collected and studied, a situation analysis and possible solutions are expected to be presented at the Academic Council in June.

Yaroslav Kuzminov

HSE Rector

Grade inflation is a real disease which has to be treated. This is what we did 15 years ago. Although there is nothing fatal in it and I don’t think we are too seriously ill, the entire approach to the problem requires further analysis.

Giving ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ to almost everyone reduces the incentive for bright students to excel and learn something outside the required programme. I believe it would be a huge mistake if we supported the notion that teachers can only include exam questions that cover what they specifically covered in lectures. This is more like a secondary-school approach, which is not appropriate for a university. Students must realize that a considerable part of what is expected from them is not memorizing what the teacher tells them, but the result of their own effort that they put into studying. Traditionally, HSE University has three types of A grades: 8, 9, and 10. Students who have conscientiously learned the required amount of information deserve an A, but it should be an 8 rather than 9 or 10.

Next 

Let’s think about how to change the current situation and how to develop a grading system that accounts for the high abilities of HSE students, as well as what we expect from those students and what they expect from us. Students are studying here to invest in their own competencies and knowledge they will use after graduation.

I think that the top grade should be awarded for real learning achievements that exceed the scope of the required material. It reflects the result of students’ own hard work during the course. Therefore, we should try to describe these efforts primarily from the point of view of the applicable criteria.

We also understand that a number of teachers fail to live up to certain obligations under their employment contracts with the university, including the obligation to provide feedback to students and pay sufficient attention to each student’s performance. What is a non-A grade? It is something that signals that a student has failed to achieve the results he or she could have achieved. In this sense, 80% ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ is the same as 80% unsatisfactory grades—it is clear evidence of a teacher’s ineffectiveness.

I believe we should begin by asking our professional teaching community (faculties and departments), which is responsible for what and how we teach, to work hard in May and June to discuss the grading scale and how to incentivize our students to step outside the required programme and become more interested in the subjects they study. This is the most important thing that we need to do.

It is clear that physicists, philologists, geographers and media people are all quite different.  Let them meet and talk. This is what we should begin with. This will be respectful of both teachers and students.

I also believe that the Student Council should take part in the discussions of departments and faculties. I kindly ask the Student Council to focus on involving students in the work of the deans and heads of departments and to coordinate these efforts.

The existing student rankings definitely affect students and teachers, and also intensify grade inflation. I think we should do our best to modify the scheme of incentivizing students by ranking-based discounts and payments. We are adopting a project-based model of teaching, so we should give discounts or raise allowances and grants only for extraordinary achievements beyond students’ regular study responsibilities. We will be shifting to this model gradually in the next few years.

Sergey Roshchin

HSE Vice Rector

Growth in the university’s average grade has been observed since the mid-2010s. The process was rather gradual, but by the last year, the situation had become more than obvious.

If we look at grade distribution statistics over the past two years, we see that the number of A’s exceeds 50%, with a small percentage of B’s and only a tiny fraction of C’s. The most prominent indicator is the average grade for research seminars. For instance, over 60% of students were awarded A grades at the Moscow campus. As a teacher, I can say that this is due to the absence of a relevant grading system. It is highly unlikely that all future bachelors will become outstanding scholars.

Next 

The European Commission’s recommendations under the Bologna Process state that a normal distribution of grades should be such that the share of A’s do not exceed 10% and B’s—25%. I believe we should work out measures that would enable our university to comply with these recommendations.

However, the problem goes beyond meeting recommendations. The issue of the university grading system is crucial for any academic community. In many ways, it is this issue that determines the added value of the university from the perspective of both its academic reputation and our position on the education market. Since the late 20^th century, grade inflation has been an issue not only for our university, but also for the entire academic community. It is a major challenge for the educational system, which has to be recognized and addressed by every university.

A specific global practice for how to overcome grade inflation already exists, and the academic community is discussing the most promising solutions to address the issue. One of them is to give students relative grades formalized against the best of the available results. This grading practice is currently used at Harvard University.

Another option is to apply the so-called ‘grading on the curve’ principle, with the bell curve or any other suitable versions used for a proper grade distribution. This grading practice is used at Princeton University and Boston University.

Yet another solution involves grading on a historical curve, which takes into account the grade distribution for a given course or programme over past years. This method can be used if there are only a few students taking a course.

Opponents of taking action on grade inflation traditionally argue that the number of bright students in a course may exceed the average. They also speak about the pressure that the TQA system puts on them. In my opinion, however, it is much more important that a proper distribution of grades indicates an adequate level of competitiveness in the learning process. Transformation of the grading system has to be discussed at the highest professional level so that we avoid creating ‘traps of educational poverty’ in the process of forming a lower scale and other errors.  

Grade inflation is threatening the reputation of our university and our added value in the academic environment. Therefore, we should begin discussing how to transform the grading system as soon as possible and be firmly committed to delivering this transformation. New grading principles are required to stop grade inflation. We also need to introduce certain measures to ensure that teachers observe these principles. For instance, we could consider introducing criteria for contract extensions, participation in teacher competitions, etc.

Moreover, we understand that methodological competence is becoming increasingly urgent. Grade inflation varies considerably between departments: a number of faculties and divisions cope with it by introducing their own and various global practices, but not all teachers are involved in the process. To improve the situation, we need to work out common principles, develop teachers’ competencies, and share expertise in building adequate grading systems.

Vadim Radaev

HSE Vice Rector

The materials prepared by my colleagues show that we have a serious systemic problem. It is truly shocking to know that the average number of ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ is now closer to 40%.

We are now running a selective Competition for Faculty Positions. We have analysed the profiles of teachers participating in this competition, and it appears that as much as 10%—32 people out of 330—give ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ in more than 80% of cases.

Is ten percent a lot or a little? In my opinion, it is a lot. We assume that teachers’ work implies academic autonomy, including in case of awarding grades. However, this does not mean the absence of rules or responsibilities. Rules do exist.

Each of us is a practicing teacher. Personally, I teach all year round. Our responsibility is to provide an adequate and differentiated assessment of students’ performance. This does not mean we should either inflate or deflate grades. Giving only ‘nines’ and ‘tens’ is the same as giving only ‘threes’ and ‘twos’.

Next 

We must have differentiation in our grades. If there aren’t tests, giving ‘seven’ to everyone seems to be the easiest option, but this would mean that a teacher isn’t fulfilling his or her obligations properly. No matter how bright the students in a group are, there is no way that all students are identical. They all perform differently, and we must reflect those differences properly.

I’d like to remind you about our experience in 2005—2006. Back then, we had a similar (although not quite as dramatic) situation related to grade inflation and devaluation. We were concerned with the problem and told our colleagues that the average grade for each subject should be no higher than 8.5 points. In addition, we held a number of meetings and were able to change the situation rather quickly.

We need to analyse the situation at the microlevel. We have submitted the information about grade inflation to human resource committees. We haven’t given any instructions, but we did ask them to pay attention to this information and consider it along with other factors. Each time, I insist on a case-by-case investigation because there may be mistakes, distortions, special cases, but there may also be routine cases when people consider it to be normal and do it all the time. This needs to be understood.

Of course, it is not documented anywhere that grades have to be differentiated. We were naïve enough to believe that there were things that teachers should understand by themselves. We are going to analyse the situation first as part of the Competition for Faculty Positions and then across the university at the individual level. We should not limit ourselves to issuing local regulations and white papers. We should talk to our colleagues to convince them that this is not the way to go. We’ve got a lot of teachers working under independent contractor agreements. They have only recently joined HSE University and may not be aware of all details. We should talk to them to explain that such an attitude to grading is not appropriate.

Grigory Kantorovich

Head of the Laboratory for Macro-Structural Modeling of the Russian Economy

The situation with grade inflation varies from faculty to faculty, so it should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. For instance, the situation in the International College of Economics and Finance (ICEF) is better than in most departments. This is because ICEF performs a separate grade analysis after each exam period and for each subject. The Academic Programmes Council deals with tracking and solving such problems as they arise.

Different universities have different positions, courses, and requirements. Therefore, I believe it is too early to introduce grading standards. Nevertheless, each teacher should understand that all A’s on an exam is a bad sign since it indicates that the teacher should have included some more difficult questions and toughened the exam requirements. However, this doesn’t mean that the teacher should have given F’s to everyone either.

Do you remember how long it takes us to assess an article? How many times it has to be refined and elaborated before it can finally be published? It is too hard now to prescribe a certain standard curve. Every course requires analysis, and teachers should be toughening exam requirements.

Sergey Pekarski

Dean of the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences

As mentioned above, the Faculty of Economic Sciences is on the other pole of the problem (we usually give less than 10% A’s). However, I share my colleagues’ concern about grade inflation, and I find this trend rather alarming. The important question I’m asking myself is why this is happening.

My hypothesis is as follows: students put certain pressure on teachers. Student rankings play an important role, and in fact, a position in the ranking displaces a real motivation for learning. Even when they are still in school, future university students get used to the fact that they need to learn how to solve standard tasks and take sample tests. Thus, they develop an attitude which determines their future behaviour—they are not required to develop genuine competencies, they are just drilled for tests.

Next 

Students do not understand that university teaches them to become smarter and more productive rather than able to pass qualification exams. They think that the teacher’s goal is to drill them for the exams, which puts pressure on the teacher in terms of what and how to teach students. Some typical cases include complaints like ‘there was a question on the exam which they didn’t explain to us during the seminars’. Because of this pressure, some teachers relax their control when it comes to assessing competencies.

This is only a hypothesis, but if it’s correct, grading standards will not solve the problem. This is a way of glossing over the problem rather than finding a real solution. It is the teaching methodology that should be changed. We should introduce new rules that would require teachers to develop critical reasoning in their students, on top of using standard test materials. Unless we manage to change the culture of teachers and students, anything else we do will be no more than an attempt to gloss over an existing problem.

May 21, 2021