Plus-grubbers

The Committee on Educational Policy has proposed changes in Harvard's rank list system which would sacrifice a reasonable attitude on grades for well-intentioned but meaningless precision.

The system now in use does not consider pluses or minuses in determining rank list, and the CEP argues that this may unfairly penaize some students. Since a B+ receives no more weight than a B-, a student with three B+'s and one C+ is assigned to Group IV while someone with four B--'s winds up in Group III.

It is hard to be concerned about this inequity in the grading system because a student's rank really has only minimal importance. In determining admission to Dean's List and such programs as Honors Tutorial a student's rank group is consulted, but most departments are flexible enough to admit students to Tutorial who fall a fraction of a grade short of the required level.

Furthermore, in the areas most critical to a student the rank group is not considered at all. Prospective employers or graduate schools are interested in transcripts, and since 1951 transcripts have included pluses and minuses.

What is significant about the rank group, however, is that it reflects the College's attitude on grades. Up to now the College has said that a B--is worth as much as a B+, thus tacitly suggesting that a student can spend his time as profitably in a non-academic activity as in an effort to eke out another half point.

Competition for graduate schools, fellowships, and summas sees to it that students spend too much time worrying about their grades. If the Faculty approves the CEP proposal, ostensibly in the interests of fairness and precision, it will add one more incentive for plus-grabbing when there are already far too many.