Will Wharton Follow HBS' Lead?
On the heels of HBS' decision to impose the end of the grade non-disclosure (http://www.clearadmit.com/2005/12/d-is-for-disclosure.html) (GND) era on its student body, it would appear that the rumblings of a policy change are growing louder at Wharton. Yesterday's Wharton Journal published two articles of note on this subject:

1) MBA Executive Committee Reveals Policy Changes. (http://media.www.whartonjournal.com/media/paper201/news/2006/01/23/News/Mba-Executive.Committee.Reveals.Policy.Changes-1492529.shtml?sourcedomain=www.whartonjournal.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com) This article describes the Executive Committee's proposed overhaul of academic life at Wharton. In essence, the proposal comes down to four suggested changes:

-Making sure that class time is "viewed as sacrosanct" by creating stricter attendance rules, eliminating potential extracurricular conflicts, rewarding student collaboration, etc.

-Placing restrictions on what the school calls 'hyper-recruiting' to reduce distractions from academics (see our blog posting on this subject (http://www.clearadmit.com/2006/01/networking-internships-early-decisions.html) from two weeks ago).

-Changing the scale for the grading system. Currently, Wharton students do in fact receive grades (they just can't share them with recruiters). The grades they receive are as follows: Distinguished (DS), High Pass (HP), Pass (P), Qualified Credit (QC), Fail (F). The new system that has been proposed involves a shift to the standard A-F scale, with + and - options. The idea here is to help students get more of a range of feedback (13 variations from A+ down to F vs. the current 5 variations). This system is also more familiar to most students.

-Endorsing the notion that getting rid of GND would be fine by them. The committee stressed that the grades students receive are "private property" and that they should have the right to disclose those grades if they wish. [Of course, keep in mind that grade non-disclosure is a student-driven policy at Wharton, so this change essentially amounts to the administration expressing their strong opinion that disclosing grades is fine with them.]

2) A History of Wharton Grade Non-Disclosure. (http://www.whartonjournal.com/media/paper201/news/2006/01/23/News/History.Of.Wharton.Grade.NonDisclosure-1492558.shtml?norewrite&sourcedomain=www.whartonjo urnal.com) This second article reprints the existing policy in detail, pointing out that it is a student driven policy. Interestingly enough, when GND was first passed in 1994, 78% of the student body voted for the policy. In other words, it seems hard to imagine the students voting it down.

For more background on GND, see our blog entry on the topic (http://www.clearadmit.com/2005/09/grade-nondisclosure.html) from September of 2005. This entry explores the pros and cons of GND while also looking at the various programs that have similar policies in place.

Of course, with the rumbles of change at Wharton, there are dozens of students, applicants and alumni weighing in on what will happen next. First-year Wharton student and Clear Admit 'Best of Blogging' award winner Bskewl posted an extensive entry in his blog about Wharton's new policy (http://www.bskewl.com/wp/archives/90), suggesting that eliminating GND might be a good idea, since it would force to faculty to look elsewhere for change when they realize that it's not the magic bullet:

".....none of the real issues are going to get fixed until we get past this grade disclosure issue. The student-enforced GND policy will remain an external scapegoat for failure to create a top-notch learning environment. The sooner that goat is slain, the sooner our administrators will be forced to turn their gazes inwards for some fruitful self examination..."

We'll have to see where the dust settles, but at present it looks as though the Wharton student body holds the cards. Of course it is also worth pointing out that this entire debate offers a very interesting look inside the differences between two leading MBA programs (HBS and Wharton) in terms of student involvement, process, etc.