The University of Michigan will eliminate traditional letter grades for first-semester freshmen starting in fall 2027, saying the change is aimed at addressing a growing mental health crisis among college students. pic.twitter.com/A90IndRbyy

— NEWSMAX (@NEWSMAX) August 11, 2026

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Translated: they don't want to fail all the bleks.

---

Well, if it isn't Hammerskin Hank wilth his brand of straight up racism. Why don't you throw in a little homophobia and they we got sumpin! Oi, Hank!

Sigh. Another thread where nobody posting understands the actual issue.

Grades are out of control. So much so, that they really do not reflect learning in any way, shape, or form. 79% of all final grades at Yale are an A. 79%. That's insanely high. Grade inflation is a real thing.

Learning is more than a grade and grades rarely accurately measure or even reflect learning. We have just been trained that they do, so we push back on all this emerging research that says we're wrong about what we think we're right about.

What's the real harm, and be specific here, in switching to this pass/fail system of grading instead of the traditional system which is clearly no longer measuring what a student has learned?

This will probably scare most of you, but 80% of U.S. medical schools have moved away from letter grades or tiered ranking for first-year students. And by first year, many schools mean the first 18 months while some only do the first two semesters.

Basically, Michigan is doing the same thing with college freshmen that doctor you see probably had done to them. And the data show no statistically significant drop in licensing exam performance. When schools switched to pass/fail, their students performed just as well on national board exams as previous cohorts under tiered systems.

There was a photo circulating on social media a few months back of an entire class of medical students without a single white student.

I guess intelligence is a trailing indicator of melanin levels.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Sigh. Another thread where nobody posting understands the actual issue.

Grades are out of control. So much so, that they really do not reflect learning in any way, shape, or form. 79% of all final grades at Yale are an A. 79%. That's insanely high. Grade inflation is a real thing.

Learning is more than a grade and grades rarely accurately measure or even reflect learning. We have just been trained that they do, so we push back on all this emerging research that says we're wrong about what we think we're right about.

What's the real harm, and be specific here, in switching to this pass/fail system of grading instead of the traditional system which is clearly no longer measuring what a student has learned?

---

A large number of students will no longer study for an A but will study for a PASS or, enough to get by. Now, the typical A student is lumped in with the "I barely squeaked by" student.

Rather than addressing grade inflation with faculty they throw all students into one of two buckets. The trouble with the PASS bucket is that it doesn't allow the cream to rise to the top in the competition for scholarships, acceptance to other schools, acceptance to the particular college within the Michigan system.

Without looking into it further, I'd be willing to bet there is a money trail to follow rather than an educational success trail.

---

Actually, the research, and I am someone who is published on this issue, does not support your conclusion. You assume that students will work to the lowest common need. And some of them will. But what the studies are consistently showing is that students who don't focus on grading now focus on learning and they actually learn more. The cream will still rise. But so will those who have traditionally and consistently struggled. We all benefit from the latter.

Realitybites said:

---

Step 1 of the USMLE is now pass fail. They are doing everything they can to remove objective measures of quality that could be used to criticize DEI practices.

---

How was the objective measure removed? If you pass the test, you move on. If you failed, you don't progress until you do. Nothing has changed. Passing scores move on. Failing scores don't. The same as it has always been.

For the record, the passing score on this test was raised in 2022. The exact same date it became a pass/fail test. The standard was raised not lowered as some on here suggest is the result of pass fail grading.

Well put

El Oso aka El Loco is just another liberal lunatic that wants DEI for everyone

4EveraBear said:

---

It goes back to the theory everyone should get a trophy just because you showed up.

---

That's actually not even close to what is happening here if you look at the data. You aren't graded for showing up. You are graded pass/fail based on your demonstration of learning. Just showing up only gets you the latter.

There are two types of students. Type 1 is externally motivated. Based on the posts so far on this thread, I would say most of you were externally motivated students. The grade is the trophy. The higher the grade. The better the trophy. The better the degree, the smarter you are. My doctorate degree means I am smarter than anyone posting on this board without one because I have a bigger trophy than those of you who don't. The traditional grading system favors this student, but it creates a problem. You become so focused on the number (grade), you might not actually be retaining anything you learned. How many of you studied really hard for a test, took the test, and then dumped the knowledge because you didn't need it anymore? Hey, me too. I collected my trophy in college algebra and have never used it again. I can't even help my own kids with their math homework. So, did I actually learn something, or did I learn to play the game and make it look like I won/I am smart?

Type 2 is intrinsically motivated. This is a student who isn't necessarily interested in the trophy to prove they learned. This student is more interested in task mastery, critical thinking, and collaboration (three of the top soft skills current employers say they value most). These students are building deep, transferrable knowledge and that can't always be done in the time compressed semester we call learning. What pass fail grading is actually doing is replacing the scale system of grades and reinforcing intrinsic motivation, prompting students to ask more questions and engage in deeper learning behaviors in their classes.

So which student learned more and is the better student? At the risk of impersonating Bill Clinton, that depends on what you mean by more and better. If test scores are how more is defined, research shows that both systems achieve similar results. Current studies have found no statistically significant difference in average scores or overall pass rates between the old grading cohorts and the new pass/fail cohorts. If there is not a statistical difference, how can you claim things were watered down and not as good in the pass fail system?

If you define better and more as which type of student has more long-term retention of the content and psychological well-being, studies (Chamberlin et al., 2018, Undergraduate STEM Tracking 2024, The Gradeless Paradox 2025, and others) strongly favor pass/fail grading as the better system for measuring what was actually learned.

cowboycwr said:

---

So how is GPA calculated?

Does that mean GPA requirements for scholarships are going away?

For grad school, law school, nursing and medical school?

Just more watering down of the system to avoid "hurt feelings" for those that can't keep up and earn it.

---

That differs from school to school, but most don't calculate it. Michigan is planning their transition for August 27 roll out. They have not released a full plan.

Maybe. Right now this is a fairly isolated thing. If it continues to gain traction, this will need to become part of the discussion.

Based on the dean of TAMU med school, I talked with two years ago, they admit based on college GPA, MCAT scores, etc. Scholarships are awarded in a similar fashion and retained at the end of year one as long as courses are passed and professors recommendations are solid.

College students will still get a GPA. In Michigan's case, it reflects sophomore through graduation. What would your GPA be if the courses you didn't want to take (core classes) were removed and only your major GPA was looked at? What if we calculated your GPA but removed your first year courses? This is somewhat similar.

I disagree on your last comment. Lots of research to support this benefits everyone. Yes, there will be kinks (scholarships) as you have noted, but those kinks are solvable.

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Liberals hate merit

---

Realitybites said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Step 1 of the USMLE is now pass fail. They are doing everything they can to remove objective measures of quality that could be used to criticize DEI practices.

---

How was the objective measure removed? If you pass the test, you move on. If you failed, you don't progress until you do. Nothing has changed. Passing scores move on. Failing scores don't. The same as it has always been.

For the record, the passing score on this test was raised in 2022. The exact same date it became a pass/fail test. The standard was raised not lowered as some on here suggest is the result of pass fail grading.

---

The residency selection process has medical students competing for spots in various specialties. Radiology, Orthopedic Surgey, Anesthesiology, and Dermatology have historically been the most competitive. Pediatrics and Family Medicine have been the least. A number of those residencies have accepted FMGs in the past to fill their rosters.

Eliminating objective standards of competence such as board scores is like hiding performance metrics for athletes at training camp. Its just that academics are perfectly willing to cover up academic deficiences to produce a black orthopedic surgeon while no NFL scout is going to accept drafting a slower player just to get a Chinese guy on the roster.

Thats the difference.

---

Do you have any proof of what you wrote?

I can assure you of this, no professional team is made up of all the "best" players. The bottom of the roster is often filled with "fits."

I had a friend (he died) who played in like 5 Super Bowl. He was 300 pounds and just a good dude that teams liked having around. Played on year for Buffalo against the Cowboys. Played the next year for the Cowboys against Buffalo.

There are so many factors that fill out a class. The first being your wealth. If your dad is named Tom Hicks, you're going to UT laws school. Period.

You can't even convince yourself that Obama was at Harvard Law because he's black but RFK jr? He was qualified.

Oldbear83 said:

---

First, that is not the whole issue. But aside from that, there absolutely needs to be a clear, objective, written and enforced standard.

Pass/Fail is bull*****

The solution is clear, objective and difficult standards. And diligent application of them.

---

None of this goes away with pass fail. Classes are still graded on a zero to 100 scale with 69.5 being the passing number. The only thing that changes is A, B, C, D, F go away and P comes in for C and higher. D gets replaced with F (which should already be happening in my opinion).

It's the same standard for passing it has always been. Those inflated As do go away though. Good riddance.

El Oso said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

So how is GPA calculated?

Does that mean GPA requirements for scholarships are going away?

For grad school, law school, nursing and medical school?

Just more watering down of the system to avoid "hurt feelings" for those that can't keep up and earn it.

---

That differs from school to school, but most don't calculate it. Michigan is planning their transition for August 27 roll out. They have not released a full plan.

Maybe. Right now this is a fairly isolated thing. If it continues to gain traction, this will need to become part of the discussion.

Based on the dean of TAMU med school, I talked with two years ago, they admit based on college GPA, MCAT scores, etc. Scholarships are awarded in a similar fashion and retained at the end of year one as long as courses are passed and professors recommendations are solid.

College students will still get a GPA. In Michigan's case, it reflects sophomore through graduation. What would your GPA be if the courses you didn't want to take (core classes) were removed and only your major GPA was looked at? What if we calculated your GPA but removed your first year courses? This is somewhat similar.

I disagree on your last comment. Lots of research to support this benefits everyone. Yes, there will be kinks (scholarships) as you have noted, but those kinks are solvable.

---

True if I only had my GPA for my major I would have a 4.0 and a lot of others probably would have as well. But the point of college is to learn your major WHILE getting well rounded and doing well in those other classes.

Also, it takes away the competitive nature of many scholarships that required a certain GPA to get and keep.

Sorry but anytime I hear "research backs this up" when talking about education or similar type things I always say provide the research. Because like most other fields you can find the research to prove whatever you want. And usually the "research" was done at 4 schools with about 5,000 kids and then everyone jumps on it and wants to apply it to the entire country when 2 of the schools were rural, one was middle class and only one was poor, had large numbers of non English speakers, etc.

Another problem is the research is old. Like pre 2000. Heck even anything from pre smartphone (2010) is invalid. Anything that doesn't take into account education has moved away from pen and paper to digital is invalid.

Finally, any research that is pre covid is invalid. The world and students are different than all the above time periods.

So yeah sorry I don't buy that doing away with grades and giving a simple pass fail is good. It may good to the weak ass baby kids that need safe spaces because they saw a red hat (any red hat) but it does nothing to prepare them for the real world.

Oldbear83 said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

First, that is not the whole issue. But aside from that, there absolutely needs to be a clear, objective, written and enforced standard.

Pass/Fail is bull*****

The solution is clear, objective and difficult standards. And diligent application of them.

---

None of this goes away with pass fail. Classes are still graded on a zero to 100 scale with 69.5 being the passing number. The only thing that changes is A, B, C, D, F go away and P comes in for C and higher. D gets replaced with F (which should already be happening in my opinion).

It's the same standard for passing it has always been. Those inflated As do go away though. Good riddance.

---

You're not paying attention. An A average stands for something. It's a lie if that 'A' student is only 75% proficient, so the solution is not to throw that guy in with everyone else who gets a 'pass', from idiots granted a 70 or better who did not really earn it, to pissing on the students who really earned the A that they are no longer granted, because some moron in the University Admin decided piss/fart was more fair.

Grade hard, be specific.

Make every grade worth what it says, and tell the whiners to pound sand.

---

You're not paying attention because that doesn't go away either. Make a 4.0 sophomore through senior year, guess what? You're an A student. Make a 4.0 those years and all Ps freshmen year, yep, A student.

You get 0 points for a P. You just pass the class and move on. It doesn't help. It doesn't hurt.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Step 1 of the USMLE is now pass fail. They are doing everything they can to remove objective measures of quality that could be used to criticize DEI practices.

---

How was the objective measure removed? If you pass the test, you move on. If you failed, you don't progress until you do. Nothing has changed. Passing scores move on. Failing scores don't. The same as it has always been.

For the record, the passing score on this test was raised in 2022. The exact same date it became a pass/fail test. The standard was raised not lowered as some on here suggest is the result of pass fail grading.

---

The residency selection process has medical students competing for spots in various specialties. Radiology, Orthopedic Surgey, Anesthesiology, and Dermatology have historically been the most competitive. Pediatrics and Family Medicine have been the least. A number of those residencies have accepted FMGs in the past to fill their rosters.

Eliminating objective standards of competence such as board scores is like hiding performance metrics for athletes at training camp. Its just that academics are perfectly willing to cover up academic deficiences to produce a black orthopedic surgeon while no NFL scout is going to accept drafting a slower player just to get a Chinese guy on the roster.

Thats the difference.

---

Do you have any proof of what you wrote?

I can assure you of this, no professional team is made up of all the "best" players. The bottom of the roster is often filled with "fits."

I had a friend (he died) who played in like 5 Super Bowl. He was 300 pounds and just a good dude that teams liked having around. Played on year for Buffalo against the Cowboys. Played the next year for the Cowboys against Buffalo.

There are so many factors that fill out a class. The first being your wealth. If your dad is named Tom Hicks, you're going to UT laws school. Period.

You can't even convince yourself that Obama was at Harvard Law because he's black but RFK jr? He was qualified.

---

While your friend may not have been the best of the best he was still cream of the crop out of ALL football players in the US.

The bottom of an NFL roster is still filled with incredibly athletic and talented guys.... just not enough to be studs in the NFL.

Pick any NFL bust and they are still better than 99% of the rest of the US football players their age. They just couldn't cut it at the elite level.

So yes an NFL roster is filled with the "best." It may be the "best of what's left" at the bottom but they are still great athletes/players.

The research I cited was 2022. That's post COVID. The A&M guy i met at a conference in 2024. That's pretty current.

cowboycwr said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

El Oso said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Step 1 of the USMLE is now pass fail. They are doing everything they can to remove objective measures of quality that could be used to criticize DEI practices.

---

How was the objective measure removed? If you pass the test, you move on. If you failed, you don't progress until you do. Nothing has changed. Passing scores move on. Failing scores don't. The same as it has always been.

For the record, the passing score on this test was raised in 2022. The exact same date it became a pass/fail test. The standard was raised not lowered as some on here suggest is the result of pass fail grading.

---

The residency selection process has medical students competing for spots in various specialties. Radiology, Orthopedic Surgey, Anesthesiology, and Dermatology have historically been the most competitive. Pediatrics and Family Medicine have been the least. A number of those residencies have accepted FMGs in the past to fill their rosters.

Eliminating objective standards of competence such as board scores is like hiding performance metrics for athletes at training camp. Its just that academics are perfectly willing to cover up academic deficiences to produce a black orthopedic surgeon while no NFL scout is going to accept drafting a slower player just to get a Chinese guy on the roster.

Thats the difference.

---

Do you have any proof of what you wrote?

I can assure you of this, no professional team is made up of all the "best" players. The bottom of the roster is often filled with "fits."

I had a friend (he died) who played in like 5 Super Bowl. He was 300 pounds and just a good dude that teams liked having around. Played on year for Buffalo against the Cowboys. Played the next year for the Cowboys against Buffalo.

There are so many factors that fill out a class. The first being your wealth. If your dad is named Tom Hicks, you're going to UT laws school. Period.

You can't even convince yourself that Obama was at Harvard Law because he's black but RFK jr? He was qualified.

---

While your friend may not have been the best of the best he was still cream of the crop out of ALL football players in the US.

The bottom of an NFL roster is still filled with incredibly athletic and talented guys.... just not enough to be studs in the NFL.

Pick any NFL bust and they are still better than 99% of the rest of the US football players their age. They just couldn't cut it at the elite level.

So yes an NFL roster is filled with the "best." It may be the "best of what's left" at the bottom but they are still great athletes/players.

---

Fantastic athlete and player. Played about 9 years. When I tell you this was a good dude, he was. You just loved being around this guy. I met Elway and Kelly from this guy.

Still, he hung around because he brought more than "40 time" or whatever false metric gets applied.

El Oso said:

---

This will probably scare most of you, but 80% of U.S. medical schools have moved away from letter grades or tiered ranking for first-year students. And by first year, many schools mean the first 18 months while some only do the first two semesters.

Basically, Michigan is doing the same thing with college freshmen that doctor you see probably had done to them. And the data show no statistically significant drop in licensing exam performance. When schools switched to pass/fail, their students performed just as well on national board exams as previous cohorts under tiered systems.

---

And the MCAT. That's because Didn't Earn It. This is not some huge secret.

All of this goes back to Didn't Earn It.

What the data shows is the Didn't Earn It students get admitted to schools they have not business attending. They struggle, get discouraged, and drop out. It is another example where the regressives care more about virtue signaling than people because for many of those students, had they attended an "on level" university they would have been successful both on school and after. Removing grades gives the schools a year to get the Didn't Earn Its up to basic proficiency without the negative headwinds of failing grades.

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Liberals hate merit

---

Are you gonna answer the question? Do you get tired?

El Oso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

First, that is not the whole issue. But aside from that, there absolutely needs to be a clear, objective, written and enforced standard.

Pass/Fail is bull*****

The solution is clear, objective and difficult standards. And diligent application of them.

---

None of this goes away with pass fail. Classes are still graded on a zero to 100 scale with 69.5 being the passing number. The only thing that changes is A, B, C, D, F go away and P comes in for C and higher. D gets replaced with F (which should already be happening in my opinion).

It's the same standard for passing it has always been. Those inflated As do go away though. Good riddance.

---

Does the A, B, C, D or F go on a transcript? Or does P/F go on the transcript?

Now do you see the problem?

The issue with the pass/fail system is that it makes it impossible to differentiate excellence from mediocrity. The same thing goes for the national boards.

As for law school, I'm sure there are as many schemes in the training process as there are in that field in general.