Is the r score, which evaluates CEGEP students, a socially just measure?

The college performance rating (CRC), generally called side robsesses CEGEP students and rightly so: it is a central element in the student selection process when they are admitted to university.

It is widely recognized that this indicator can have a considerable impact on the professional integration and career choice of a student. On the other hand, although the side r constitutes an important lever frequently used within the university network in order to admit students into contingent programs (medicine, law, psychology, etc.), different issues and limits can be noted in relation to the implementation of this measurement system.

As a professor-researcher in education at the Université du Québec à Rimouski, I have had the opportunity to work in recent years with a variety of stakeholders in the college network. This collaboration was the spark for a reflection on the methods of using the side r within the post-secondary education network.

How the allocation system works side r

The award of the side r is done by comparing the results that a student obtained in each of his courses with those of other students who have progressed within the same class groups.

To do this, two indicators are considered, namely: the Z rating and the Group Strength Indicator (GSI). Essentially, the Z rating is established by referring to the normal distribution of data (commonly called the Gaussian curve) within a sample of results.

Taking a look at the figure above, the center point of the normal data distribution curve corresponds to the mean of the results of a sample. The data distribution curve is based on the postulate that, it is expected that:

• About 68% of the data will fall within plus or minus one standard deviation of the mean;
• Approximately 95% of the data will fall within plus or minus two standard deviations of the mean;
• More than 99.5% of the data should fall within plus or minus three standard deviations of the mean.

In addition, following a change made in 2017, the IFG corresponds to a correction factor which takes into account the results of ministerial examinations.

Thus, the measuring system of the side r relies on a combined use of the z rating and the group strength indicator (GSI). To this end, a recent article published in the journal Collegiate Pedagogy allows to present in detail the terms of allocation of the side r to an individual.

The levers resulting from the use of the side r

It is important to emphasize that the side r of an individual can be put to use for different purposes.

In fact, this can be a preferred tool allowing guidance counselors to support CEGEP students in their decision-making regarding their choice of training.

Already thousands of subscribers to the La Conversation newsletter. And you? Subscribe today to our newsletter to better understand the major contemporary issues.

Additionally, as mentioned earlier, the side r is also frequently used by university staff to analyze and accept applications for admission submitted to various contingent undergraduate programs.

Finally, from the student’s point of view, this indicator can serve as a reference point to consider the level of involvement and academic commitment necessary to integrate the desired training program(s). Thus, this measure can serve as a lever for developing a study plan that can be followed by the student in order to achieve their personal and professional goals.

A shift in the assessment approach used?

Various issues can also be raised regarding the implementation of the measurement system. side rTeachers working in the college network may experience some confusion regarding the evaluation approach to use.

In this regard, it is important to mention that the measurement system of the side r is based essentially on a normative comparison made between students. This system is distinct from the skills-based assessment approach that was implemented in college in 1993.

The competency-based assessment approach essentially aims at the appropriation of know-how in students, leading them to mobilize a diversity of resources and skills in a given situation. This approach promotes the use of criteria (criteria-based assessment) to assess the level of mastery underlying the development of pre-established skills.

For example, in light of the recent adaptation of the Nursing Skills Framework, a person studying in this program is required to be assessed with regard to the development of their professional skills, such as: the ability to act with humanism in supporting the patient or the ability to treat any activity with scientific rigor.

On the other hand, as mentioned in the document Evaluate so it really counts published by the Higher Education Council (CSE) in 2018, the implementation of the measurement system of the side r is likely to generate a certain shift. Indeed, rather than favoring an assessment approach by skills, the side r can lead teachers to position their assessment practices using the objectives model.

This model differs from the competency-based approach mainly in that it involves an accumulation of points through the completion of various assignments and exams. In addition, this model tends to ensure that the grade awarded to an individual is considered in relation to the grades of other students.

Applications matching the required profile eliminated straight away?

Another issue reported by the CSE concerns the predominant place occupied by side r in the university selection criteria. This approach can lead to the elimination of certain applications that nevertheless have the profile sought for a given program.

To this end, the Fédération étudiante collégiale du Québec (FECQ) proposed in 2011 in its opinion “For a reform of university admission” complementary or alternative means of selecting students in university programs.

For example, the contributions resulting from the use of the CASPer test are presented by the FECQ. Essentially, the performance of this test implies that the candidate finds himself engaged in a variety of situations that require his judgment skills as well as the adoption of appropriate behaviors. Moreover, a recent study (published in 2019 in the journal Academic Medicine) concerning the access of students to medical schools, shows that the use of this test contributes to increasing cultural and gender diversity within this type of program.

Social inequalities likely to turn into educational inequalities?

The FECQ notes a final issue related to the changes in teaching methods that have resulted from the Covid-19 pandemic as well as the disparity in study conditions that each student benefits from.

Some training activities are still delivered remotely or in hybrid mode. Considering that not all students necessarily benefit from either a home arrangement conducive to learning or exclusive access to a computer, the situation can lead to inequalities.

As mentioned by the CSE (2018), students who benefit from better family and socioeconomic conditions may find themselves at an advantage. Thus, the heterogeneity of study conditions may be accentuated in the context of distance learning.

This observation should be taken into consideration to the extent that the Quebec education system promotes a principle of equal opportunity. Awareness of this situation could help prevent social inequalities from turning into educational inequalities and eventually into professional inequalities.

In view of the various issues identified, an invitation was recently launched by the FECQ to bring together and involve different stakeholders in the education system in an in-depth discussion concerning the contributions and limitations arising from the implementation of the education measurement system. side rWe can therefore ask ourselves whether this type of initiative will lead us to soon witness changes in evaluation practices within the college network establishments.