Below is the grading scale for EULER, incorporating letter grades (A to F), GPA equivalents (0–4.0 scale, with detailed increments such as 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, etc.), French grading equivalents (based on the 0–20 scale commonly used in French higher education), and explanations for how each grade reflects the meeting of course objectives.
This scale aligns with EULER’s emphasis on quality assurance and academic rigor, ensuring clarity for faculty and students in assessing performance.
EULER Grading Scale
| Letter Grade | GPA Equivalent | French Grade (0–20) | Explanation / Standards for Meeting Objectives |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 4.0 | 16–20 | All objectives fully met: The student demonstrates exceptional mastery of all course objectives, producing work of outstanding quality. Response Papers (RPs), Major Papers (MPs), quizzes, and oral examinations reflect deep critical thinking, flawless execution, and original insights. No revisions are needed, and academic integrity is impeccable (e.g., plagiarism rate <10% via Grammarly). Citations are authoritative, and communication is professional and precise. |
| A- | 3.7 | 15–15.9 | All objectives fully met with minor suggestions for improvement: The student meets all course objectives with high proficiency, producing excellent work. Outputs show strong analytical depth and adherence to standards (e.g., Turabian referencing), but minor refinements could enhance clarity or impact. For example, an MP may have 2–3 footnotes per page but could benefit from slightly more diverse sources. Feedback is minimal, and performance is near-exceptional. |
| B+ | 3.4 | 14–14.9 | All objectives met with specific suggestions for improvement: The student achieves all course objectives satisfactorily, with work reflecting good understanding and competence. RPs and MPs are well-structured and meet academic standards, but specific areas (e.g., deeper analysis or more precise referencing) require improvement to reach excellence. Oral examinations are coherent but may lack some nuance. Revisions may be needed for MPs to align fully with graduate-level expectations. |
| B | 3.0 | 13–13.9 | Satisfactory output, but improvements expected to fully meet objectives: The student meets course objectives at a baseline graduate level, producing acceptable work. Outputs demonstrate adequate engagement with material, but issues such as inconsistent referencing, limited critical depth, or minor errors in RPs/MPs indicate room for growth. Oral examination responses are satisfactory but may lack sophistication. Multiple revisions may be required to achieve full alignment with course goals. |
| B- | 2.7 | 12–12.9 | Passing but less than satisfactory output: The student minimally meets course objectives, with work showing basic competence but notable deficiencies. RPs may lack engagement with key concepts, MPs may have insufficient citations (e.g., <2 footnotes per page), or oral examinations may reflect limited preparation. Significant improvements in academic writing, analysis, or communication are needed to meet graduate standards. Revisions are often required. |
| C+ | 2.4 | 11–11.9 | Minimum passing grade: The student barely meets course objectives, with work falling short in multiple areas. Outputs reflect minimal engagement, with issues such as poor structure, inadequate referencing, or superficial analysis. Oral examinations may show basic knowledge but lack depth. Extensive revisions are mandated to achieve passing quality, and academic integrity concerns (e.g., plagiarism rates near 18%) may arise. This is the lowest passing grade. |
| C | 2.0 | 10–10.9 | Failing grade: The student does not meet mandatory course objectives. Work fails to demonstrate graduate-level competence, with major deficiencies in RPs, MPs, or oral examinations (e.g., missing key concepts, incoherent arguments, or excessive errors). Plagiarism or failure to follow templates may be evident. Significant rework is needed, and course completion is not achieved. |
| C- | 1.7 | 8–9.9 | Failing grade: The student falls well below course objectives, with work showing little to no alignment with expectations. Outputs are incomplete, lack academic rigor, or contain serious violations (e.g., plagiarism rates >18%). Oral examinations fail to demonstrate basic understanding. The student requires substantial intervention to progress. |
| D | 1.0 | 6–7.9 | Failing grade: The student’s work is grossly inadequate, with minimal effort or understanding reflected. Assignments are incomplete or irrelevant, and oral examinations are unsatisfactory. Academic misconduct, such as blatant plagiarism, may be present. Course objectives are not met in any meaningful way. |
| F | 0.0 | 0–5.9 | Failing grade: The student fails entirely to engage with course objectives. No credible work is submitted, or assignments contain severe academic violations (e.g., extensive plagiarism or AI-generated content without attribution). The student shows no progress toward course goals, requiring complete reevaluation of their approach. |
Additional GPA Increments
To provide precision in grading, EULER uses intermediate GPA values where applicable, particularly in the B+ to A- range, to reflect nuanced performance:
- 3.9: Near-perfect work, with only negligible suggestions for improvement (French: ~15.8).
- 3.8: Extremely high-quality work, slightly below A due to minor stylistic or analytical adjustments (French: ~15.5).
- 3.6: Strong performance, with all objectives met but specific areas needing refinement (French: ~14.8).
- 3.5: Very good work, with consistent quality but clear opportunities for enhancement (French: ~14.5).
- 3.3: Good performance, meeting objectives but requiring targeted improvements (French: ~14.2).
- 3.2: Satisfactory work, with broader improvements needed to reach higher proficiency (French: ~13.8).
- 3.1: Baseline satisfactory performance, with multiple areas for growth (French: ~13.5).
Notes on Application
- Alignment with Quality Assurance: This scale supports EULER’s IQA Policy by emphasizing authentic quality in student outputs (e.g., RPs and MPs) over procedural compliance. Grades reflect the degree to which students achieve intellectual and professional mastery, not just task completion.
- Faculty Guidance: Faculty are expected to provide detailed feedback justifying grades, particularly for B+ and below, to guide student improvement. For example, a B+ grade should include specific suggestions for enhancing analysis or citation practices.
- French Grade Context: The French scale (0–20) is included for international alignment, with 10/20 as the minimum passing threshold, equivalent to C+ (2.4 GPA). Higher grades (16–20) reflect exceptional performance, consistent with EULER’s global standards.
- Avoiding Grade Inflation: EULER maintains a rigorous grading policy, ensuring that an A (4.0) is reserved for truly outstanding work. Faculty should use the full range of grades to accurately reflect student performance, avoiding the tendency to cluster grades in the A/B+ range.
This grading scale provides a clear, equitable framework for assessing student performance, ensuring that evaluations are tied directly to the achievement of course objectives while accommodating international grading conventions. Faculty should refer to this scale when assigning grades and communicate expectations to students to foster transparency and academic growth.
