Pass-Fail Should Pass

The Committee on Educational Policy is now considering a proposal, put forth by the Harvard Policy Committee, which would permit a student to make one of his four courses a pass-fail course. As long as a student does passing work in that course, he would receive no letter grade.

Supporters of a pass-fail system correctly point out that students will be more likely to dabble in strange fields if they do not have to worry about marring their grade averages. An ungraded course would encourage intellectual experimentation--which is entirely healthy.

The CEP approved an HPC pass-fail proposal a year ago, but that proposal, later rejected by the new HPC which came into office in the Spring, was a poor one. It called for an optional pass-fail fifth course, rather than a pass-fail fourth course. Such a proposal would not be very different from auditing, where a student attends an extra course, does as much of the work as he wants to, and doesn't have to worry about a grade. It would have no effect on the large number of students who have never expressed a desire to audit a course. And many students who think they should worry only about four courses would not give themselves the time to capitalize on a fifth course pass-fail option.

Some opponents of pass-fail feel that most students would take, in effect, only three courses, since it is next to impossible to fail the fourth one.

But this argument assumes that taking a course and sweating out a good grade in the course are the same thing. The new pass-fail proposal would cut the number of courses students worry about, but more important--would let them try a different and rewarding approach in the fourth course.

The four-course pass-fail, therefore, has something for almost everyone.