{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0273972602739726, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02595529920692141, 'mean_word_length': 5.034782608695652, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Effect of Various Grading Scales on Student Grade Point Averages

Objective. To investigate changes in and the impact of grading scales from 2005 to 2010 and explore pharmacy faculty and student perceptions of whole-letter and plus/minus grading scales on cumulative grade point averages (GPAs) in required courses. Methods. Grading scales used in 2010 at the University of Cincinnati College of Pharmacy were retrospectively identified and compared to those used in 2005. Mean GPA was calculated using a whole-letter grading scale and a plus/minus grading scale to determine the impact of scales on GPA. Faculty members and students were surveyed regarding their perceptions of plus/minus grading. Results. Nine unique grading scales were used throughout the curriculum, including plus/minus (64%) and whole-letter (21%) grading scales. From 2005 to 2010 there was transition from use of predominantly whole-letter scales to plus/minus grading scales. The type of grading scale used did not affect the mean cumulative GPA. Students preferred use of a plus-only grading scale while faculty members preferred use of a plus/minus grading scale. Conclusions. The transition from whole-letter grading to plus/minus grading in courses from 2005 to 2010 reflects pharmacy faculty members’ perception that plus/minus grading allows for better differentiation between students’ performances.