Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education.

Education, as defined by John Dewey, is the process of learning and acquiring knowledge, skills, beliefs, values and habits. To achieve this goal of education, a student’s focus must be on the holistic learning process and not just confined to high-grades. Thus, the statement that competition for scoring high grades seriously limits learning at any level of education is agreeable; however, one must not undervalue the role of competition in education.

The primary reason to endorse the statement has to do with the influence of competition-based education on the learning process. When students know that they must score certain grades to outdo each other for getting admission into a top-tier university or a job, they tend to focus on exams rather than the process of learning. Gone would be the days of discussions with Mathematics teacher about application of probability theory in sports gambling, with English teacher on overcoming public speaking anxieties and so on. Their only priority is to learn certain important questions that are most likely to appear in the exams. When they know that they have to memorize from page 1 to 10 from a particular textbook to score an ‘A’ grade, the standard syllabus is compromised let alone the out-of-box thinking and experimentation. Some even go the extent of adopting unfair means such as seeking leaked out exam questions, copying assignments, cheating and what not. A student with an exam-oriented mindset can never get the quality of learning needed to achieve the very goal of education.

The second reason to support the statement is the psychological damage that the pressure for competing for high-grades inflicts on students. With numerous assignments to complete, impossible deadlines to meet, giant syllabus to cram and crunch time to prepare for exams, a student can never achieve the level of motivation and mental freedom required to explore the subject. Moreover, the resulting stress seriously restrains the mental and intellectual abilities of the student. There are cases, when unable to cope with the pressure and competition students have taken the drastic step of suicide. The recent unabated number of suicides in the renowned Indian Institutes of Technology is a glaring example.

Another reason in favour of the statement is the limited comprehensiveness of examinations to cover the entire syllabus. A 2-3 hour exam can only test students on certain topic and concepts. A high score in the exam can never be the assurance of a student’s complete grasp of the subject. Therefore, competition for high-grades and exams can never be a prompt for effective and broad learning at any level of education.

However, one must refrain from completely disregarding the role of competition in education. It motivates students to learn at least some selective topics which they might find useful at their next level of education or career in later life. Moreover, it provides a platform for gifted students to distinguish themselves from the ordinary multitude and get deserved scholarships and accolades. Thus, the pragmatic approach for educational institutes is to employ novel assessment techniques for grading students instead of completely doing away with the idea of competition among peers. Open book tests, field projects, technical interviews, etc. can be used as evaluation tools for assessing students which would ensure that learning is encouraged, not impeded, while reaping the rewards of healthy competition.

In conclusion, while competition for high-grades motivates and distinguishes meritorious students, it puts a ceiling on the effectiveness of learning mainly because of rudimentary and rigid methods of student assessment. Employment of novel appraisal methodology as mentioned above can remove this ceiling without compromising with the benefits of competition at any level of education.