5/6 Ontario medical schools look at your first year average - considering that's a majority, i'd say it is a lot more than "few". When I think about it, if your first year is one of your best, changing it to pass/fail can also affect you negatively at Western. I was looking up law schools, it was very similar (but there are more law schools than med schools). The same applies with OT/PT (M Sc.), they also look at your cGPA. Don't forget out of province schools as well. You fail to mention how many American schools have not implemented a pass fail system, as you may learn from psych 2h03 base rates are important :p.

With research positions for graduate school (both basic laboratory and clinical) GPA is important as hell. Sure, they'll put emphasis on your final years but it doesn't mean that they won't look at your first year marks. Professors like: growth and consistency. If you have a good first year and continue to do well, you'll get preference over someone who has a higher cGPA because of an excellent final year.

This also affects undergrads looking for a thesis prof in 3rd year. You need to send profs your transcript. If the only thing that you have are 2nd year marks and *maybe* a semester of 3rd year marks, it might affect your chances for the reasons that I mentioned above.

The only people that a pass/fail system would benefit are people who do poorly in first year. Some people need to aim for a high mark in order to motivate themselves to actually study. Just passing a course (+ 60%) is easy. Pass/fail feels like a NCLB program, while I think it's important to help people who are struggling, this hurts people who need to feel challenged academically. Plus, people who lose their scholarships that reward them for having high cGPAs/sessional GPAs would be annoyed with this proposal.

As for a secondary mark method, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of pass-fail? Then people would still be focusing on their first year marks. I think a pass fail system is great for graduate schools, as most grad students have high cGPAs in general (A-/B+). The same can't be said for high school students as there's no standardization for their averages.

... bleh, I've gotta catch my bus home. :p I'll edit this later.

You still assume that adjustments wouldn't be made to accomodate a new grading scheme, which is clearly not the case. McMaster is an accredited and leading research institution and its students wouldn't be removed from consideration simply due to a new grading scheme for first-year marks. How do you think students from MIT apply and get into graduate schools? They certainly do quite well considering the reputation of MIT and its students.

Here's a recommendation from the Illinois State University, which is one thing I've been looking at in my research.

The Academic Standards Committee is recommending a pass/fail program for the following reasons:

1. A pass/fail system would allow greater course selection for the student. It would encourage students to enroll in courses they otherwise would not take. For example, students majoring in sociology might be reluctant to take a course in mathematics because they would have to compete with mathematics majors. But under a pass/fail program, they could take such a course without fear of the competition from mathematics majors. Hopefully, then students would explore new fields and broaden the base of their education.
2. The pass/fail possibility may help students to see that educational growth may be measured by their own growth in knowledge, attitudes, and appreciations rather than a single letter grade. The constant pressure on grades would be reduced by this system.
3. Laboratory or skill level courses are sometimes difficult to grade on an A, B, C grade level. For the same reason, research and thesis work would be well suited to a pass/fail system.
4. A pass/fail system would allow another possibility for removing deficiencies for graduate entrance requirements since such courses might be taken on a pass/fail basis.
5. The pass/fail program has been successfully instituted at several universities: Millikin University, the University of Iowa, Yale University of Michigan, University of Illinois, Ohio State University, Stanford University, Tufts University of California (Berkeley), Syracuse University, Pennsylvania State University, Pomona College and Grinnell College.

The MIT system works like this (in a nutshell)

Semester 1: Pass/No record (that means if you fail, it's not on your transcript)
Semester 2: A/B/C/D/No record

Second year and beyond: A/B/C/D/F

With this system, you still finish first year with a GPA. The benefits are numerous... students are no longer pressured to make 90's all the time, and can transition to university life much more smoothly. They are more likely to take courses they are interested in, instead of looking for 'bird' courses to pad their average. They may be more willing to participate in extra curriculars, creating more well-rounded students.

Anyways, this is off-topic for this thread. I'm not finished my preliminary research yet, so I'm not going to speak further on the subject. Once my research is complete, I'll be able to put together different ideas/alternatives and begin to talk and poll students about them.

You still assume that adjustments wouldn't be made to accomodate a new grading scheme, which is clearly not the case. McMaster is an accredited and leading research institution and its students wouldn't be removed from consideration simply due to a new grading scheme for first-year marks. How do you think students from MIT apply and get into graduate schools? They certainly do quite well considering the reputation of MIT and its students.

Yes, of course, but it doesn't mean that the students won't be affected by it. If Mac decides to take up the same marking scheme as MIT with a pass/fail first term and a graded second term, it's quite possible that the second term courses will be weighted double (causing MORE pressure in the second term) OR the year may not count (Western, Ottawa) OR special weighting systems may not apply (for example U of T's drop your lowest full-year equivalent).

1. I've enrolled in humanities/social sciences courses, I've known social sciences students who have taken biology/math for pure interest. I don't think it's fair to say that a humanities student would do more poorly compared to their math counterparts -- many have taken physics/chemistry/geometry/calculus and would likely do the same anyways. Regardless of whether it's pass or fail, people will take what they're interested in.

2. Like I said earlier, some people need marks for motivation. If people just aim to pass, they may not get the necessary background knowledge for upper year courses. While, ideally, people study for the sake of knowledge, some do not.

3. I do agree with this point. Although there are ways to grade things such as theses and research courses: results, quality of paper, amount of effort. This summer I've worked up to 12 hour days, 6 days a week in order to get good publishable results. Pass/Fail rewards slacking and striving for the minimum - why would you put in more effort if you can just skate by?

4. If people really care about pass fail for graduate requirements, they can just take it in summer school. Same thing. I don't see the point of wasting funding so that people can be lazy during their first year.

5. You must've missed my comment about the importance of base-rates.

...

With this system, you still finish first year with a GPA. The benefits are numerous... students are no longer pressured to make 90's all the time, and can transition to university life much more smoothly. They are more likely to take courses they are interested in, instead of looking for 'bird' courses to pad their average. They may be more willing to participate in extra curriculars, creating more well-rounded students

Graduate schools and supervisors are smart enough to figure out what a bird course is, so if people are silly enough to use bird courses for average padding they're in for a shock. A 12 in underwater basket weaving doesn't make up for a 6 in basic chemistry. Once again, less emphasis on schoolwork/grades ≠ more extracurriculars. Apparently I have a high cGPA but I do a minimum of 25 hours/week of extracurriculars (not including social stuff, travel time, etc). You can do well in school and be a well-rounded student, you just have to know your learning style and your limits.

Well I will admit it that I don't have any research on it but a couple of knee jerk reactions: #1 MIT is being used as the main inspiration(Though you did mention a number of other pass/fail institutions as well, I would also love to know how many have a traditional grading system, though that is something you will come with research!) but MIT is a highly exclusive institution with 9-10% entrance rate. Even of those people I guess they want the best of the best to continue their record of research success. Mac is a diverse institution with large number of Arts students who get in with much lower average then say a healthsci. If every kid at Mac had the same average as a HealthSci and it was even I would say go for it. But grading possibly helps filter through Arts and Commerce Students especially since alot of their material is subjective. In for example Philosophy the class average is C- or C+ and only a few get B+ and an occasional A. A pass fail scenario in that situation would piss of alot of high achievers and remove their motivation to make their essay extra good.

I am having a hard time explaining that to you but in Arts there is a HUGE Difference between a C+ and a B+ that difference is "quality" of work, it is an everlasting struggle for every arts students to get that extra oomph in his essay to get a B; to get an A he needs to do something really special; once again unless you take 10 courses a year that have that its hard to explain, I have taken Physics and Calculus as well so I know where I'm coming from with this comparison.

You might not have that in Science where a C+ and B+ is the number of MCQ's and short answers you get right!

A simple Pass/Fail destroys all that I guess :S Also as a secondary point I'm an International so I've never been to a Canadian highschool but I heard its a bit of a joke at some levels and people don't have to work "that" hard to get a 75% for an entrance to Mac. Hence it is neccesary for the admin to have a grading system that pressures people with negative attitudes towards post secondary schooling to get their act together(a String Of C's ought to do that!)

That I suppose is contradictory to your people can self evaluate themselves point. Its a very ideal and quixotic idea, it could work well but just like many of my personal philosophies/ideas it is a very hypothetical one. I don't trust most first years to be able to do that! :S

Secondly I guess I agree with Jay about Motivation from a philosophical perspective

#3 We can get that into an operating policy but the senate I heard is very conservative when it comes to changes regarding such stuff! They still have that 12 point system(though not alot is wrong with that I guess). Your policy will have to be top notch, especially if Jay is right and 5/6 med schools consider your first year!

But good luck with it though! Policies are the least we can do!

p.s: Admin's I guess we should move this to another thread? Sorry I just HAD to write in my response before I go to my night shift then get knocked out the next daay :(

Thanks Huzaifa

My motivation is admittedly specifically for Science students (that's my job after all) (and I imagine it would be beneficial for engineers as well). From people I have spoken to, Humanities students and Soc sci's are more likely to be against any sort of pass/fail.

Jay, I understand your points and I'm taking them into consideration, however I feel like one of your primary concerns with any possibly pass/fail system is that it might promote "laziness". A system such as this may warrant a passing mark as high as a 75%, leading most students who pass to be technically "above average" and work relatively hard. I don't think it promotes laziness, I think it brings the relative importance of first year down to where it belongs (honestly, the stuff you learn in first year is hardly graduate material). A poor first year grade doesn't warrant a ruined GPA and lost chance for a successful academic career. A student can do relatively poorly in first year (due to legitimate reasons such as issues with transition) and be a highly successful student and scholar in the rest of his/her undergrad. The poor 1st year marks can ruin that, even though they are essentially irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. This is what I want to protect against.

Regardless, thanks for this little preliminary discussion, I'm looking forward to the second stage of my research where I actually fully discuss with and poll students.

Ben, I see your reasoning and I definitely agree that first year material should be given less importance than the rest of their undergrad career. But, I think the first year knowledge provides an important basis for upper year material. With a solid foundation, it makes upper year courses a lot easier. For example, instead of memorizing completely new material, they can opt to reason things out based on their prior knowledge. This is especially important since there's a large difference between high school curriculums.

I can see where you're coming from with a higher pass mark, but what about the people who are average/would normally pass under the mac system? Getting a 75+ is quite difficult in humanities courses, due to the subjective nature of the courses. On the same note, I didn't find it too difficult to get a 75+ in science courses so I would probably still be lazy. If you can find a better way to determine pass/fail, it should be interesting to hear.

I understand that a poor first year shouldn't ruin an entire academic career due to issues adjusting, and what not. My first year wasn't that great, I probably could've done better, but after 120 units everything starts to even out. Plus, like I mentioned earlier, many supervisors like to see growth - so even if you have a poor first year, but manage to do a lot better in your upper year courses they'll take it into consideration.

The proposal should be interesting nonetheless. : ) Best of luck!

Originally Posted by Taunton

Thanks Huzaifa
I don't think it promotes laziness, I think it brings the relative importance of first year down to where it belongs (honestly, the stuff you learn in first year is hardly graduate material).

People have been saying this since... grade school. All it's accomplished is to make incoming first year students lazier than ever. Honestly, most high school students have figured out that investing effort is not necessary for good grades. And now you want to implement a system that will further encourage people to not do their utmost best?

Honestly, I don't care if what they're learning is as trivial as the multiplication tables, at some point of time people need to realize that hard work IS very real part of life. Implementing a pass/fail system in first year is just going to push that realization into second year. Transition stress and anxiety are a very real part of the world... it sucks, but the sooner students learn to deal with it, the better.

Besides, how would a pass/fail system allow for competitive acceptance into second year programs?

Originally Posted by Geek

People have been saying this since... grade school. All it's accomplished is to make incoming first year students lazier than ever. Honestly, most high school students have figured out that investing effort is not necessary for good grades. And now you want to implement a system that will further encourage people to not do their utmost best?

Honestly, I don't care if what they're learning is as trivial as the multiplication tables, at some point of time people need to realize that hard work IS very real part of life. Implementing a pass/fail system in first year is just going to push that realization into second year. Transition stress and anxiety are a very real part of the world... it sucks, but the sooner students learn to deal with it, the better.

Besides, how would a pass/fail system allow for competitive acceptance into second year programs?

Again, I say look at MIT, one of the most competitive and successful schools on the planet. It's a system that works.

By implementing a type of pass/fail first-year system, we could justify increasingthe workload, or increasing the required passing mark.

"...gotten to know - and done drugs with - my professors."

Anyone here willing to share stories about that? :p

Originally Posted by sinthusized

Anyone here willing to share stories about that? :p

I would if I had stories. XD

It'd be so sick, lmao.