In courses attended by undergraduates as well as graduates, it has often been found that the more advanced men soon establish a lead in their work, which can never be overcome by the less learned members of the course. This is almost sure to be the case, because most undergraduates devote a part of their time to interests other than their courses.

To a candidate for distinction or a contestant for a scholarship, marks are of the utmost importance. The result of the condition outlined above is to force such men to take courses in which they will not meet graduate competition. This is manifestly unfair, for it limits in their choice of electives those men to whom their courses are of greatest significance.

In the past the same difficulty has arisen, and in certain cases has been solved by grading the work of undergraduates and graduates upon different scales. This arrangement seems just to all concerned except in one particular. In publishing the Rank List it is scarcely fair to print for the same course an undergraduate's A without differentiating it from the B of a graduate whose knowledge may be far broader and more profound. It would be an easy matter to distinguish these two classes of marks, and base the grades upon a standard of progress instead of absolute attainment.