The Online Reflector

By Marcus Whalbring
Entertainment Editor

Finals are upon us again, and that means students will sift through their notes and textbooks and stuff their heads with facts until they bleed algebra equations from their noses. They’ll finish their tests and go home, filing away the facts they have studied like old birthday cards, and then they’ll move on in hope that the formulas and definitions they read repetitively will magically resurface should they ever be needed again.

So why does this cycle repeat itself every semester? Why do students force themselves to remember facts for two hours and just forget them later? It’s for the sake of an “A.”

Obviously, most schools in the United States use the letter grade system to measure the results of a student’s performance, but other forms are starting to sprout up around the country on the grade school, high school and college levels.

A Feb. 20, 2002, article by Claudia Rowe of the New York Times features an abnormal system of grades and curricula from a program in the Hudson Valley Sudbury School System. According to Rowe, the students pursue any subjects that appeal to them, such as “video games, woodwork or…Barbie dolls and ballet.”

The idea that Sudbury is applying sounds like it’s straight out of the movie “Accepted,” but the teachers and faculty at Sudbury believe that students will learn through their own interests and passions.

Rowe’s article also states that students will learn secondary subjects while they’re pursuing their interests. For instance, a student who likes to play video games probably will have to learn to read in order to understand the directions that show him or her how to play.

On the MSN Web site (www.msn.com), Christina Couch discussed schools such as Reed College and New College of Florida that have no grades. As a result, there are no tests to stress over, no assignments with deadlines and no late-night work. The students’ education is more relaxed, and they claim that they learn more with that system.

However, the biggest question that arises is whether or not these alternative systems work. According to Rowe, a study in 1991 showed that some students enrolled in the Sudbury Schools (87 percent of 188 students) ended up enrolling in higher education including institutions of Yale, Columbia University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

According to Couch, students from New College of Florida receive a long evaluation from their professors when they finish school. They aren’t graded, but they discover their strengths and weaknesses and are evaluated on competence and progress. Therefore students cannot complete lackluster work.

So what does all this mean? Is the system we use at this university flawed? I certainly don’t think it would hurt to try something new. But if it simply can’t be done, perhaps it is up to the students to make sure that they get the most out of their education.

Schools such as Reed College and New College focus a lot on small classrooms, close attention from professors and class discussion.

At the University of Indianapolis, we are blessed with small classes that allow us to receive more attention from our professors and each other. But we also have a responsibility to ourselves to ask questions and inspire new ideas and ways of thinking.

I’ve taken a couple of classes at UIndy that had a different structure but still used letter grades. The difference was that students were encouraged to be involved in discussions and hands-on experience.

I would encourage any student to find out if any classes like that are available to them. They can inspire growth. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone say that no one cares what your GPA is when they’re considering hiring you. If that’s true, maybe we should try to focus more on bettering ourselves and challenging our own ideas. After all, it’s our education. It’s up to us to make of it what we will.