Sayed A Mostafa, Robert Ferguson, Guoqing Tang, Mujahid Ashqer
{"title":"An Analysis of the COVID-19-Induced Flexible Grading Policy at a Public University.","authors":"Sayed A Mostafa, Robert Ferguson, Guoqing Tang, Mujahid Ashqer","doi":"10.1057/s41307-023-00315-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To help students cope with the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, higher education institutions offered students flexible grading policies that blended traditional letter grades with alternative grading options such as the pass-fail or credit-no credit options. This study conducted an in-depth analysis of the flexible grading policy at a medium-sized university in the USA. We studied the differential selection of flexible grading options by course characteristics and students' sociodemographics and academic profiles between Spring 2020 and Spring 2021. We also examined the impacts of the policy on sequential courses. Our analysis utilized administrative and transcript data for undergraduate students at the study institution and employed a combination of descriptive statistics and regression models. The analysis revealed that the flexible grading policy was utilized differently depending on course characteristics, with core courses and subjects like mathematics, chemistry, and economics having higher rates of usage. Additionally, sociodemographic and academic profile factors led to varying degrees of utilization, with males, urban students, freshmen, and non-STEM majors using the policy more frequently. Furthermore, the analysis suggested that the policy may have disadvantaged some students as they struggled in subsequent courses after using the pass option. Several implications and directions for future research are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47327,"journal":{"name":"Higher Education Policy","volume":" ","pages":"1-34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10199666/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Higher Education Policy","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-023-00315-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
To help students cope with the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, higher education institutions offered students flexible grading policies that blended traditional letter grades with alternative grading options such as the pass-fail or credit-no credit options. This study conducted an in-depth analysis of the flexible grading policy at a medium-sized university in the USA. We studied the differential selection of flexible grading options by course characteristics and students' sociodemographics and academic profiles between Spring 2020 and Spring 2021. We also examined the impacts of the policy on sequential courses. Our analysis utilized administrative and transcript data for undergraduate students at the study institution and employed a combination of descriptive statistics and regression models. The analysis revealed that the flexible grading policy was utilized differently depending on course characteristics, with core courses and subjects like mathematics, chemistry, and economics having higher rates of usage. Additionally, sociodemographic and academic profile factors led to varying degrees of utilization, with males, urban students, freshmen, and non-STEM majors using the policy more frequently. Furthermore, the analysis suggested that the policy may have disadvantaged some students as they struggled in subsequent courses after using the pass option. Several implications and directions for future research are discussed.
期刊介绍:
Higher Education Policy is an international peer-reviewed and SSCI-indexed academic journal focusing on higher education policy in a broad sense. The journal considers submissions that discuss national and supra-national higher education policies and/or analyse their impacts on higher education institutions or the academic community: leadership, faculty, staff and students, but also considers papers that deal with governance and policy issues at the level of higher education institutions. Critical analyses, empirical investigations (either qualitative or quantitative), and theoretical-conceptual contributions are equally welcome, but for all submissions the requirement is that papers be embedded in the relevant academic literature and contribute to furthering our understanding of policy.
The journal has a preference for papers that are written from a disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspective. In the past, contributors have relied on perspectives from public administration, political science, sociology, history, economics and law, but also from philosophy, psychology and anthropology. Articles devoted to systems of higher education that are less well-known or less often analysed are particularly welcome.
Given the international scope of the journal, articles should be written for and be understood by an international audience, consisting of researchers in higher education, disciplinary researchers, and policy-makers, administrators, managers and practitioners in higher education. Contributions should not normally exceed 7,000 words (excluding references). Peer reviewAll submissions to the journal will undergo rigorous peer review (anonymous referees) after an initial editorial screening on quality and fit with the journal''s aims.Special issues
The journal welcomes proposals for special issues. The journal archive contains several examples of special issues. Such proposals, to be sent to the editor, should set out the theme of the special issue and include the names of the (proposed) contributors and summaries of the envisaged contributions. Forum section
Occasionally, the journal publishes contributions – in its Forum section – based on personal viewpoints and/or experiences with the intent to stimulate discussion and reflection, or to challenge established thinking in the field of higher education.