Naval Academy

Low Grades in Electrical Engineering Courses Surface Broader Issues Gao ID: NSIAD-91-187 July 22, 1991

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO investigated two incidents occurring at the U.S. Naval Academy's (USNA) electrical engineering department, focusing on the effect on faculty of the: (1) removal of the chairman of that department; and (2) decision to administer a final examination that may have been compromised.

GAO found that: (1) after almost half of midshipmen received unsatisfactory grades in introductory electrical engineering courses for nonmajors, the academic dean advised faculty to raise the grades in those courses; (2) the academic dean, citing a need for new leadership to improve student performance, removed the chairman of the department after he refused to raise grades; (3) the superintendent, citing his faith in the honor system, did not allow the faculty and the academic dean to delay a final examination after break-ins occurred in two faculty members' offices; and (4) there was no evidence of mass cheating on the examination. GAO also found that: (1) faculty members felt that the administration had improperly infringed on their role in academic matters; (2) the academic dean accepted a faculty-written policy statement supporting faculty autonomy in awarding grades; (3) some faculty members expressed concerns that the grades they gave could affect tenure decisions and performance ratings; (4) in response to the low grades in introductory electrical engineering courses, the academy shifted some first-semester course material for nonengineering majors to the second-semester course, deleted some material from the second-semester course, used an easier textbook, reduced the number of homework problems, and composed final examinations exclusively of previously assigned homework problems; and (5) it could not determine whether the higher grades obtained since those changes resulted from the lessened course difficulty and lenient grading practices.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.