U of T recently published final grades for 2024 fall term courses, which has left me reflecting not only on my academic performance but also on the larger grading policies at work evaluating students.
I think U of T’s grading policies — such as maintaining course averages within a set range and charging fees for exam remarks — raise important questions. Are these practices fair? Do they truly align with the goals of higher education?
I see U of T’s grading policies as unethical because they value institutional consistency over individual academic achievement and financial accessibility.
Grade distribution
At U of T, instructors follow grading guidelines that encourage keeping course averages within a specific range to prevent grade inflation and ensure consistency across programs. The U of T Faculty Handbook notes that in large first- or second-year courses, the percentage of As should “reasonably” fall between 15 per cent and 35 per cent.
In theory, these policies seek to ensure equity between the many classes being taught, but in practice, they directly contradict the fundamental purpose of grading. If students in a class are doing exceptionally well, why should their grades be artificially lowered to meet an arbitrary distribution?
For Daniel Mathew — a third-year student studying economics, public policy, and mathematics — although “it’s fine to keep course averages within a certain range to counter grade inflation… The point of a grade is to show how much content in a course you know.” On these grounds, Mathew believes that “If you know everything that has been taught[,] then you deserve full marks[.]” He added that “exams shouldn’t be made more difficult than needed just to keep [the] average low.”
Interestingly, Eyad Ibrahim — a third-year student studying cell & molecular biology and genome biology — points out that the other facet of grade curving — upward instead of downward — masks another problem. “[W]hen all the class gets a low grade[,] [students] get curved up[,] which is good from a student perspective [But] it doesn’t address the root cause of the problem [which is] that the students aren’t understanding the material,” he said in an interview with The Varsity.
I agree with both Mathew and Ibrahim — the ultimate goal of grading should be to measure students’ understanding of course material and their ability to apply what they have learned. Grading should represent learning, not arbitrary grade-range parameters. Grades should thus not be skewed upward or downward to satisfy unfair rules.
However, U of T’s grading policies often prioritize these parameters and the consistency they provide over accurate reflections of students’ academic performance. This approach undermines the integrity of the grading system and the learning process itself.
Exam re-mark fees
One of the other highly problematic policies at U of T is the regrading fee. Students are charged $37.75 when they request a re-mark of their final exam. Although this fee is returned in case of a grade change, it still constitutes a financial obstacle for students who feel that their grades may not have been accurately recorded but cannot afford to spend money on a re-mark that may not even result in a grade change.
Mathew opposes the policy strenuously, saying “If a TA made a mistake grading a final, the student should not have to pay to have it corrected. It’s a mistake on the part of the course [instructor] and [the] university, not the student.”
Ibrahim also points out that many students struggle financially. “Many students I’ve personally met, Canadian and international, face tough financial strain due to university fees and all other [fees associated] with living outside your parents[’] home.” Housing, tuition, and other general expense unaffordability have been a prominent issue faced by students — both domestic and international. While exam remark fees may seem like a drop in the bucket, small-scale expenses like these can pose large-scale problems for students in an increasingly unaffordable city like Toronto.
We should discourage re-mark fees because I believe they reflect a greater injustice at play: economic inequality. Higher education is already prohibitively expensive, especially for international students and those from low-income backgrounds. Charging them again for something routine like a re-mark is exploitative. Instead, U of T should allocate funds to offset these kinds of expenses, or altogether waive the fee for students experiencing financial hardship.
Accessibility should be essential to our grading systems. Placing financial barriers in front of students who seek accurate evaluations of their work is as fundamentally unfair as setting arbitrary grade distribution ranges.
If the university truly values equity, it should reallocate resources to eliminate remark fees or at least have an option to waive them for students with financial need.
Taking steps to change
I think U of T’s grading and re-mark policies reflect the broader challenge faced by institutions of higher learning to find a balance between simultaneously upholding their academic standards and ensuring fairness for students.
While grade inflation and grading consistency are valid concerns, these policies do more harm than good. Arbitrary grade distribution rules and unfair exam re-mark fees place undue burdens on students at the cost of their academic growth and fairness.
If U of T is truly committed to creating an equitable learning environment, it needs to reconsider the mechanisms it employs to do so. Grading should be used as a measure of academic knowledge and progress, not used to satisfy statistical quotas or to generate revenue for the university by charging students unnecessary fees. Fairness, transparency, and accessibility are the keys to the development of such a system which would truly support students and academic success.
Matt Lee is a third-year student at Innis College studying English, history, and philosophy of science and technology. They are a CIUT.FM production team leader and a CIUT.FM board of directors student representative.
