<p>I agree with MechRocket. Even if Bio 1AL is not as fair as it could be, the fact is, if you do well on the midterms (I’m talking A or A-'s) you’ll almost definitely get an A in the class, no matter what section you’re in.</p>
<p>Edit: Also I may be completely wrong about this, but I have never heard that he curves some sections to C- and some sections to A-. I thought the extremes were C and B+. (Not to mention that this only applies to quizzes, which are not a super big part of your grade.)</p>
<p>I have to say though, what I think is most sketch about Bio 1AL is that some GSIs (mainly Helen, not sure if there are any others) give their own students awesome supplemental resources for studying, yet ask them not to share them with kids from other sections. I mean sure this may not be in Helen’s best interest, but isn’t the goal of this class to learn??</p>
<p>@wt1234: if you told me one of the bio 1al GSIs did that without giving me a name, i would immediately guess it’s helen anyways. </p>
<p>i never liked her. she thumbed her nose at me a couple of times in office hours because she thought i was a slacker who didn’t study and just went to office hours right before quizzes. she was right LOL, but still, what a B. hahahaha.</p>
<p>Lol dang, my GSI doesn’t give out any supplementary stuff at all. I find it ridiculous that Helen would tell her students to not share. That is unprofessional and effed up.</p>
<p>@MechRocket: It really isn’t a personal (oh woe is me I won’t get an A) thing.
I had a lot of personal stuff going on this semester and I didn’t do as well as I could’ve/should’ve. </p>
<p>That’s irrelevant to the greater point at hand – that grading based purely on some kids’ average on one midterm while knowing that GSI quality, lab time and lab day-of-the-week all play a large role in the overall performance of any given class is inherently unfair.</p>
<p>Meighan is so proud of his adjusting strategy, but then why doesn’t he adjust for other factors, such as known GSI quality and lab time? God knows he’s said himself that “some sections consistently do worse/better.” No self-respecting statistician would ever use his method.</p>
<p>GSI quality? you can get all the information from the book anyways. you can also attend any of the GSI’s office hours. how exactly would he adjust for something so subjective anyways?</p>
<p>lab day of the week? again, all the information is in the book, so even if you have a quiz on Tuesday, it should not be a problem. and if you really want to hear meighan lecture, just go stream a lecture from last year. </p>
<p>lab time? like it’s such a huge disadvantage to have your lab in the evening as compared to in the afternoon or morning. is he really going to adjust the grades because people are sleepy at night? seriously?</p>
<p>all those factors you listed do not play a “large role” in how well you do in the class. the fact is, if you’re a go-getter you’re probably going to do well anyways.</p>
<p>attention all of you people complaining about evening lab:</p>
<p>try having a tues morning lab. kthxbai.</p>
<p>trust me, you are better off with an evening lab towards the end of the week. i would barely have time to digest any of the stuff meighan would throw at us on monday by tues morning. consider yourselves lucky.</p>
<p>GSI quality does matter. It impacts how you feel about the class tremendously. Plus, GSIs can show you the ropes in regards to what you should focus on in the class.</p>
<p>I currently have a GSI who has a look on his face 99% of the time like he wants us to all to collectively die.
Not surprisingly, he doesn’t provide much insight and isn’t very helpful.
Great motivator, huh? </p>
<p>"Midterm 1: flat B
Quizzes: Below average
Midterm 2: solid A
Top 5 section</p>
<p>Final grade: A- "</p>
<p>Also LOL way to criticize and nitpick me when your stats were about similar (I’d say below average in a top 5 section = average/slightly above in a low ranked one?)</p>
<p>bro, you said your complaining about meighan’s system wasn’t “a personal thing,” but it clearly is. </p>
<p>lols, i feel i perfectly have the right to criticize and nitpick you. </p>
<p>yes, our stats are similar, but there’s a difference between you and i. i didn’t spend much time whining on CC about how meighan should factor in stupid, trivial shit like GSI quality, lab day of the week, and lab time (give me a ****ing break). instead, i spent that time studying a lot and ended up scoring high on MT2 and earned my A-. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i dunno man, it sounds to me like you’re just looking for excuses as to why you’re not doing so hot in this class. </p>
<p>i’ve had bad GSIs before. we all have. suck it and go study.</p>
<p>i think that the GSI quality does play a role in how the class will perform. Having a GSI that emphasizes certain material more than others would inevitably lead to a different understanding and in turn a different grade on Lab Exam 1. </p>
<p>The problem seems to be the variability of education that each student receives. And the fact that this variability isn’t due to a students own motivation or understanding but the time at which a lab section fits their schedule and the luck of GSI they get (maybe motivation plays a small role but with all other things equal, the kid with a better GSI will do better). </p>
<p>I’m guessing that once grades come out and I see how much the curve actually helped, I’m going to be a bit less irritated about this class.</p>
<p>… I don’t know about that. The semester I took bio 1al, my gsi was new, didn’t like the class (didn’t gsi ever again), and spent little time explaining the material. However my class did well as a whole.</p>