Disclosure of Wharton MBA grades sparks controversy

The "grade grubbers" are scuffling with the "slackers" again at the Wharton School. For the first time in the three years since voting overwhelmingly not to reveal grades to recruiters, Wharton MBAs are involved in a debate over "grade non-disclosure." The opening salvo began three weeks ago, when Wharton Graduate Division Associate Director Anjani Jain -- a non-disclosure advocate during the 1994 referendum -- argued in the Wharton Journal that transcripts should be available to potential employers. "[In 1994] I felt [non-disclosure] would encourage students to focus on long-term learning instead of narrow, exam-oriented studying in courses," Jain wrote in the Journal. "I have now come to believe [it] does considerably more harm than good to the school's academic environment and its long-term reputation." The subsequent two issues of the Journal featured defenses of the status quo as well as related discussions about the honors and grading systems of MBAs. "The problem [with disclosing grades] is that many professors have different standards for grading people," second-year MBA student Rutger van Spaandonk said, adding that some professors reward "just showing up for class" while others expect real work. "How are you going to measure performance?" he asked. "You have to have tough standards" if you disclose grades. Spaandonk also noted that graduate and undergraduate business students have different objectives. "For [graduates], the grade per se is not as important," he said. "It's what you get out of the class." But pro-disclosure advocates say that, far from "study for its own sake," the current system encourages "just getting by." "We have a whole group of kids who have been successful since childhood by working hard," said Mike Gordon, editorial page editor for the Journal. "Now they'd like to have two years to take it easy." And Jain said many discussions with faculty and students have convinced him an "environment of academic indifference" is emerging among MBAs. Wharton Graduate Association President Kathy Taylor said the WGA is "working to address faculty concerns about class standards," but stressed that these problems were not related to grade non-disclosure. "The main complaint we're hearing [from faculty] is at the level of preparation," the first-year MBA student said. Taylor added that the grade non-disclosure policy strengthens Wharton's "core competencies" -- good teamwork skills and lots of extracurricular activity. "Putting grade disclosure back in would cannibalize those competencies," she said. Those favoring grade disclosure argue that it would not affect the teamwork ethic. "I believe in something called honest competition," said first-year MBA student Steve Ahn, managing editor of the Journal. "I don't believe you get this cutthroat [ethic]." "We're not just competing against Wharton, but against Harvard and Stanford," who disclose MBA grades, he added. But Spaandonk said non-disclosure encourages prospective employers to look at multiple dimensions of a candidate. And Taylor said the longer the policy is in place, the more it becomes "ingrained in recruiters minds" as a part of the Wharton character. To many, however, that argument is patronizing to recruiters. "Grade disclosure is a statement," Jain said. "And no matter how nuanced we make it, the recruiters can't judge the overall candidate." And further concerns arise over the loopholes in the existing policy. "How naive to think that denying recruiters information is going to make a difference," Gordon said. Ahn said potential employers "cheat" by offering summer internships and then looking at grades before offering a job. And recruiters rely more heavily on GMAT and even Scholastic Assessment Test scores to judge a candidate, he said. Taylor said the WGA is working on a compromise solution -- allowing more students to make the Directors List, an honors program that allows recipients to reveal their grades. Jian said this change would make sense, likening the current policy to "being able to talk about clubs of which you're a president, but not those where you're treasurer or vice president."