Author: George Baker
The Problem With Grades
It doesn’t matter if it’s not on the test
There once was a little girl who very much enjoyed to learn. She found the world a place filled with wonder and mysteries to discover. At first, school was a magnificent place; eager for knowledge and driven by curiosity, the girl thrived in an environment facilitated by skilled educators.
But then, the girl turned eleven, and suddenly the government got involved.
Although the little girl might not like it, of course, every rational adult agrees that there ‘needs to be standardised tests so we can accurately compare the results of schools and children and eventually use that data to stream children into different ability groups so the adults can extract the highest potential grades at GCSE level’.
And of course, ‘we absolutely need economic growth, and therefore, we must heavily encourage our children into STEM subjects at the very earliest age; after all, they’ll earn more that way, and we’ll be able to collect higher taxes’…
But for the little girl, suddenly that joy of learning was slowly being replaced. Now she was being told—by her peers and the adults—’it doesn’t matter if it’s not on the test!’.
Suddenly, learning—for its own sake—didn’t seem so fun anymore.
Suddenly, it was all about the test—it would decide everything—success could mean big pay cheques; failure could mean years of shame and uncertainty.
Everyone seemed in on the game: her peers, her parents, her teachers…
Suddenly, school became serious. Suddenly, learning for its own sake didn’t matter. Suddenly, it was about the grades…
Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation
Even if we instinctively know that grades take the fun out of learning, what may be less clear is why?
The answer lies in two different types of motivation: on the one hand, there’s intrinsic motivation—that would be learning for its own sake—on the other hand, there’s extrinsic motivation—that would be learning as a means to an end. Grades are what we call an extrinsic motivator.
Decades of research has shown that extrinsic motivators are effective in the short term, but ineffective in the long term. For example, a fear of punishment may motivate us to do a piece of homework which we don’t find interesting, however, once that fear is removed, we are unlikely to do a task which we don’t find valuable in and of itself.
Here are some of the damaging consequences caused by the extrinsic nature of grades:
- Undermining the intrinsic value of learning for its own sake. When students are motivated by an extrinsic motivation to get higher grades, this undermines intrinsic motivation: a desire to learn for its own sake. In other words, when we grade students, they are likely to focus on learning as a ‘means to an end’, rather than something of intrinsic value.
- Creating a preference for the easiest possible task: grading students sends the message that success is more important than learning. Therefore, with the danger of a low grade hanging over them, students are much less likely to take any risks, explore their intellectual curiosities, or do anything beyond what is required to achieve the reward of a high grade.
Conversely, intrinsic motivation—a desire to learn for its own sake—is a much more powerful form of motivation. When we are motivated to learn, simply because the act of doing so is valuable to us—without the distraction of a grade—we are likely to learn far more, follow our curiosities, and take risks with our explorations.
The ‘token’ economy: how economics hijacks the true purpose of the education system
Given that we intuitively know that grades take the fun out of learning, and the research about intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation shows us that intrinsic motivation is much more powerful, why is the entire education system set up to destroy the intrinsic value of learning in favour of a rewards based system of examinations and grades?
This, I believe, gets to the core of the issue: what is the purpose of school?
On the one hand, here’s how I would answer that question:
- Help children grow into responsible adults, whilst accepting that ultimately, they need to find their own path and make their own choices;
- Impart critical thinking skills upon the next generation, so that they’ll be more likely to question dangerous ideologies and unhealthy ideas;
- Empower children to follow their interests and talents, supporting them along that journey.
On the other hand, this is how I believe most people would answer that question:
- Ultimately, school is about earning potential: children need to be put into a position where they can be financially successful, and in doing so, aid in economic growth;
- GCSEs and A Levels are a ticket to university, which is itself a ticket to success in adulthood; school is just about teaching children how to ‘play the system’, even if what they have to do to get there isn’t valuable in and of itself.
Education policy is really about economics, not learning. My evidence for this is the absurd focus on STEM—that’s science, technology, engineering, and maths—which are all of course very valuable subjects. However, if school was really about learning, then would these subjects be placed so conspicuously above the arts, philosophy, history, literature, etc.?
Grades are part of what we call the ‘token economy’, which is full of extrinsic motivators: ‘do this and you’ll get that’. Study for this test, and you’ll get a good grade—there’s your token—which you can trade for a place at a university. Do this university course and you can trade your certificate for a lucrative career. Do this lucrative career—even if it’s mind-numbingly dull—and you’ll get a huge pay cheque every month. So on, and so on.
School is simply the first step of a long journey titled ‘do this and you’ll get that’.
Are grades a measure of success?
When I was sixteen, I took part in the British GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) exams.
These exams were across ten different subjects and graded—at the time—between “A star” and “E”.
I achieved five “A star”s and five “A”s—results which would commonly be regarded as impressive in my culture.
However, I have now come to view these grades as less meaningful, since in practice, they were mostly the result of memorising facts and exam answers.
For example, I achieved an “A star” grade in history, and yet I know nothing about the Napoleonic Wars, very little about the history of the United States of America, and I could not recount a single fact about the Great Wall of China.
When it comes to being skilful at researching historical artefacts or knowledgable about famous past events, then grades—even high ones—are very poor indicators that someone has the aptitude to be a historian.
Unfortunately, it usually means that—like me—they memorised exam answers and techniques as a means to an end: to obtain the extrinsic reward of a grade.
On the other hand, whilst I was at school, I taught myself to how to code—a skill which wasn’t really tested by exams—because I was intrinsically motivated to do it. Now, I’m a professional software engineer.
So grades I would argue aren’t really a good measure of success. At the end of the day, they’re just a letter or a number which doesn’t even reflect how someone might perform over a long period of time; rather, they act as snapshots of how much information someone can regurgitate in a one hour period.
What would be far more valuable to do in school would be coursework done over a long period of time, e.g., a portfolio, set of essays, or an explanation of a mathematical theory or technique.
The way forward: choice, collaboration, and the value of learning
Grades place a huge emphasis on individual learning, however, the truth is collaborative learning has shown to be both more effective and more useful in the real world after school.
Furthermore, grades often force students to learn things which frankly aren’t interesting or useful and we give children very little choice in what they learn.
Finally, grades tend to teach children that learning is about committing facts to memory rather than critical thinking and learning to form their own opinions about the world.
A major skill which is required in most workplaces is collaboration, however, grades don’t give any indication whatsoever how skilfully or effectively an individual can work with others to achieve something.
What I think would be much more effective would be a combination of giving students more choice in how and what they learn, fostering their intrinsic curiosity about the world, and teaching children how to work together, i.e., collaboration.
Empowering children to make their own decisions about their own education is much more likely to teach them that learning is valuable in and of itself and that learning doesn’t have to stop when they leave school; rather, it should be encouraged as a lifelong endeavour.