A Grade Cap Will Hurt Language Learners

When my beginner Korean teacher asked who had prior knowledge of the language, every student raised their hand — except for me.

Introductory language programs at Harvard are often inundated with students like these, who intentionally take classes below their level of experience. For the true newcomers, this already fosters an unwelcoming environment, discouraging exploration beyond the College’s two-semester foreign language requirement. But the worst is yet to come: if the new grading proposal is passed, experienced speakers will likely be the only recipients of A’s, further damning beginners — and language programs in the process.

No one should have to compete with a room of people leagues ahead of them. It’s demoralizing. In the first two weeks of class, I was learning the Korean alphabet while other students were having entire conversations. I was more than willing to put in the hours, yet my progress paled in comparison. Now in my second semester of Korean, I still haven’t closed the gap.

Beginner language learners aren’t the only casualties. When students already know the curriculum, instructors also lose out. Their talents and time are wasted teaching those who have little to learn in the first place.

To be clear, I don’t blame other students. Language placement exams aren’t binding, and while students are encouraged not to take a course below their level, it’s all too easy to do so. For experienced speakers, the benefits are clear-cut and risk-free. You kill two birds with one stone — score an easy A and fulfill graduation requirements. There’s simply no incentive to take the truly challenging class.

Fundamentally, it’s unreasonable to expect individuals to solve a collective action problem. Rather, to democratize foreign languages, the administration must reform affected departments via incentives or enforcement.

Harvard dug itself into this hole. When you make the framework too lenient, people will consistently find ways to take advantage. The Korean language program is prone to this issue. Experienced speakers in beginner classes have become so normalized that gaming the system is the standard, not the exception.

Korean is one of several languages at Harvard currently offering heritage tracks, courses specially designed for experienced speakers. Yet, even with these departmental safeguards in place, advanced speakers still go under the radar in lower-level classes. There exists no top-down regulation — the issue is systemic.

While the onus is on Harvard to find a solution, the administration has gone the opposite direction. In early February, a faculty committee released a grading proposal that called for a 20 percent cap on A grades, with the opportunity to award four additional A’s per class. On the surface, the proposal seems to increase rigor: In the face of tougher grading, language students would be forced to study harder, fast-tracking a path towards fluency. Yet the influx of experienced speakers circumvents this progress.

Students with prior knowledge will have an automatic advantage, and likely claim all the available A’s. Beginners taking the appropriate introductory courses already start miles behind in the semester-long race to an A, and the grading proposal would only further widen this gap.

Moreover, this could discourage beginners from studying language beyond what is required, as grading pressure would be another stress in an already-difficult classroom environment. And if newcomers don’t pursue languages, how will language departments survive? Without a steady flow of students — not only experienced speakers — language departments would be crippled.

Obviously, Harvard cannot let this happen. Students and departments wouldn’t be the only casualties — the foreign language requirement would become pointless. Why have the requisite if curiosity to learn is a non-factor? If Harvard truly wants to recenter academics, language included, the grading proposal is a step back, not a step forward.

The University can instead combat the collective action problem via incentives or a stricter registration process. Grading introductory language courses on a satisfactory or unsatisfactory basis would incentivize students to learn without fear of being outperformed. Alternatively, enforcing in-person oral and written placement tests would enable instructors to place out overqualified students.

If we want to grade language classes rigorously, we must begin a rigorous restructuring of the departments themselves. Foreign languages at Harvard should be welcoming to all students — especially beginners.

Kai I. Russell, a Crimson Editorial editor, lives in Wigglesworth Hall.