course grade of A, B, or C. However, the general decline in D's and F's earned at midterm and as a final grade is noteworthy.

The purpose of this analysis provides a snapshot examination of data with intent to understand academic outcomes to improve student performance, the effectiveness of curriculum delivery, and student-learning outcomes. For future reporting purposes, it would be most beneficial to examine the relationship between mid-term grades and final grades and evaluate whether mid-term grades are predictive of student success in undergraduate level courses (as measured by final course grades).

Theoretically, mid-term grades account for about half of the final grades and are designed to give a true signal to the students as to their performance up to the mid-point of the class. Mid-term grade feedback can be used by both the student and instructor to modify approaches to delivery and learning, or if content with the mid-term outcome, continue with present behaviors.

One issue is with the fidelity of the midterm grade signal. If instructors do not intentionally structure course assignments and expectations that will give students an accurate indicator, there could be negative outcomes, such as (1) scheduling assignments equally without back-loading at the end of the course, (2) neglecting to provide timely feedback on assignments or, (3) fails to issue midterm grades were issued; then students cannot rely upon midterms to determine performance by the end of the course. Unintended effects could be the premature dropping of classes, thereby extending the time-to-degree of the student. Equally, as problematic is if the student abandons the major and/or the University. If midterm grades are a false signal, midterm grade points become insignificant and unreliable. Assuming the fidelity of the signal and that the midterm accounts for 50% of the final grade, it seems likely that midterm grades are strongly predictive of student success as measured by final grades.

The Office of Institutional Research provided the total raw data counts and percentages by grade. The reports are produced from final grade data as of June 3, 2016. Thus, grade changes may cause the data to change between reporting dates. Therefore, reports for terms more than one year prior may reflect the effect of Incomplete grades reverting to satisfactory or failing grades.

The present report is intended to expand on earlier analyses by including grade distributions from both fall and spring terms over the academic years 2013 through 2016. These findings represent three fall terms and three spring terms during which a total of N=35,023 letter grades (A-F) were awarded. For this report, mid-term or final grades recorded as blank, FX, I, IP, N, NA, P, and W were excluded.

[8]