Whether Duke has a vibrant intellectual life for undergraduates depends almost entirely on its students and faculty. If these two groups want to establish serious intellectual exchange, then Duke can have all the intellectualism it wants. But if they don't, making an intellectual village won't help. The social contract for intellectual activity begins in the classroom. And like all contracts it requires something of both parties. It requires both of them to make an honest effort and demand honest effort from each other. Right now that contract is found rarely in classrooms at Duke. Truth be told, it exists in quantity at precious few institutions.
Instead what commonly exists is what Anne Matthews describes in her book "Bright College Years" as a "nonaggression pact" between students and faculty. In our pact, faculty promise not to push students. Courses tend to be lightweight in content and workload. Grading is easy. In exchange, students promise not to bother faculty after class and impinge on their research time.
If Duke wants to elevate its intellectual intensity, it needs faculty who are willing to shave off a little more of their research time and provide undergraduates with a solid education. It needs students that are willing to remonstrate and avoid the classes of faculty who are poorly prepared or try to get by on easily graded classes that expect little in the way of intellectual involvement. It needs both faculty and students to engage in a dialogue on how to achieve the goal of having a consistently high intellectual experience.
What's the role of leadership in all of this? If leadership wants to manipulate housing slots and tweak Duke's social life, let it go ahead with the caveat that it shouldn't make life so sterile for students that they are required to go off campus to have some fun. But if leadership really wants to help, it needs to stop making duplicitous statements that it thinks Duke provides its students with an outstanding intellectual experience and education. It's hard to solve a problem when Duke's public face is one that adamantly denies that any problems exist.
I didn't intend to write about grade inflation, but given that The Chronicle recently wrote about my Washington Post article....
First, my article never was intended to promote local changes in grading at Duke. Grade inflation is a national problem. It should be dealt with at a national level.
I don't agree with The Chronicle that the magnitude of GPA is irrelevant. When mean GPAs reach about 3.3 at an institution, grading beyond the freshman level is essentially binary, consisting of almost entirely Bs and As. Under these conditions, it's very difficult to distinguish between those who do good work and those who are truly exceptional. It is also hard to motivate students who need the motivation of grades.
The Chronicle is correct in stating that there are differences in grading across departments. Here are the numbers. In the 1998 academic year, the mean GPAs for the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences were 3.50, 3.34, and 3.10, respectively. These inequities have widened over the years. Those interested should see: http://www.hostcompany100.com/goneforg/diffgrades.htm.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.