grade inflation
More on Letters of Recommendation and Lying
I’ve been busy this month with writing letters of recommendation for my students - more than I’ve ever written before, by a long shot.
I just submitted one letter using an online form that asked me to rank this student. I was given four choices for the ranking:
[ ] Best student this year
[ ] Best student in five years
[ ] Not applicable
[ ] Best student in [ ] years
I guess this means that if my student is anything less than “best student in X years” then I’m supposed to say that her/his ranking is “not applicable.” This is the ranking equivalent of fast food drink sizes: do you want big, really big, or enormous? Is there something wrong with small? More to the point, is there something wrong with simply having been a good student, one who will flourish in grad school? How am I supposed to compare my students in this way? And isn’t this inviting me to either lie by making them all “best in show” or damn my student by failing to praise him/her?
Lying and Letters of Recommendation
Each fall I write a lot of letters of recommendation for my students. This fall is no exception. In fact, I’m writing more this fall than ever before, and I’m happy to report that I think all the students I’m writing for are in fact worthy of strong recommendations.
I’m also reading Sissela Bok’s book Lying, in which she has a sub-chapter on letters of recommendation. She makes the very sensible point that inflated letters of recommendation do some harm to everyone involved, and urges us to consider being far more honest than we tend to be in such letters. The problem is that as this kind of letter has become mandatory, there has been something like “grade-inflation” across the board with these letters. Arguably, no one expects letters to do much more than give a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down. But the form of the letter implies that the recommendation is not a binary decision but a nuanced exposition of the character of the recommendee.
Now, my principle has been to avoid saying behind someone’s back what I would not say to their face. But maybe I have the wrong orientation; maybe I should be more concerned about the person to whom the letter is addressed than the one about whom it is written.
I take my role as an advocate for my students seriously, and I attempt to do so with integrity. I will not lie about my students, or so I tell myself. But if I fail to point out small character flaws, does that count as a lie? Am I obligated to make letters of recommendation into tell-all sessions? What obligation do I have to scrutinize my students' weaknesses for future employers and for graduate schools? What do you think?