In a recent article for the Martin Center, I delve into the provocative ideas presented in a new book by Professor Joshua Eyler, who argues for the abolition of grading in education. Eyler’s perspective, rooted in a long tradition of educational reformers like John Dewey, posits that grades transform schools from nurturing environments of discovery into competitive arenas fraught with anxiety.
Eyler’s vision is strikingly utopian; he imagines a world where the absence of grades fosters creativity and collaboration, much like Marx’s dream of a classless society without private property. However, this raises significant questions about the role of grades in motivating students. Eyler claims that traditional grading stifles curiosity and creates artificial barriers to learning. But based on my experiences with college students, it appears that many lack intrinsic motivation for their studies. There are certainly those who would be content to secure credit for courses without engaging with the material at all.
So, what does Eyler propose as an alternative? While he advocates for a complete elimination of grades, he suggests interim measures such as “collaborative grading,” wherein students negotiate their grades with professors. In practice, this would likely lead to a situation where no student receives anything lower than a C, as even the least motivated students would advocate for inflated grades based on their efforts rather than actual understanding.
The arguments presented in Eyler’s book are unconvincing and lack a clear framework for improving educational outcomes. Nevertheless, his ideas may resonate within education schools, potentially influencing new teachers to reject the traditional grading system. As we explore the future of education, we must critically examine whether abolishing grades truly serves the interests of students or merely aligns with a well-meaning but impractical vision for schooling.
