教育心理类雅思阅读：Coarsework.docVIP

教育心理类雅思阅读：Coarse work 　　BRITISH universities, it appears, are considering abandoning a 200-year old system of degree classification in favour of the American GPA model. At present, students are bunched into grade clusters. The top 10-20% receive a 1st, the majority receive a 2.1 or two-one and the stragglers receive either a two-two or a 3rd. The latter group can be very small (5%) at the elite universities but is larger nationally. 　　The main reasoning for this is that it is hard for employers to distinguish between graduates if everyone has a 2.1 grade. But it is possible for employers to ask for a full transcript of individual grades, though this is not nearly as common in Britain as you might expect. The stronger point (which you might have already picked up on) is that the existing system can be difficult to interpret internationally. Adopting the GPA system would be helpful to undergraduates wishing to study or work abroad. 　　I think this might be missing a trick. My experience of the 1st/2.1/2.2 system is that it has a very strong effect on students’ work effort. For weaker students, either those of lower natural ability or the more workshy, fear of the notorious Desmond (cockney rhyming slang after the eponymous archbishop) is the ultimate motivator. Many attractive careers simply advertise the minimum requirement of a 2.1, and therefore getting the lower grade can be quite a handicap in the job market. 　　For stronger students, the aspiration of a first, the only true distinguisher in the system, is also a strong incentive. The risk is that working quite hard could leave you with only a high 2.1, largely indistinguishable from all other 2.1’s. The crudeness of the grading system drags everyone up. 　　An interesting paper by Pradeep Dubey and John Geanakoplos of the Cowles foundation at Yale Univeristy makes the same point. They write: 　　Suppose that the professor judges each student’s performance exactly, though the performance itself may depend on random