<p>There have been published articles/data that said the average was 3.26 as fo 1999 (likely even higher now). On average, more than half of you guys will graduate with honors.</p>
<p>
[quote]
At the University of Chicago, 65 percent of the graduating undergraduate class of 2003 finished their careers with a grade-point average of at least 3.25. That's up from 50 percent of the graduates in 1989.
<p>
[quote]
A survey by Princeton last year found that A's made up between 44 percent and 55 percent of undergraduate grades at 11 institutions: the eight Ivy League colleges plus Stanford, M.I.T. and the University of Chicago.
<p>"At the University of Chicago, 65 percent of the graduating undergraduate class of 2003 finished their careers with a grade-point average of at least 3.25. That's up from 50 percent of the graduates in 1989."</p>
<p>If you want a tough grader, I can enthusiastically recommend a specific classics prof who gives 1/4 of the class Ds. :)</p>
<p>Well, I took two classes in the chem dept (one was orgo) at NU and half of those classes got C range or below. Still, NU has grade inflation and no one there denies that. They even have a well-cited article detailing it. UChi has grade inflation, just not as inflated as Harvard/Stanford. But for some reason, some, if not many, UChi people try to pretend they aren't affected by it; maybe they don't like the idea that UChi isn't immune or all that "different" from others after all and they are insecure about its image. There are schools where average GPA is 2.7-2.8 (Alabama, UC Riverside..etc) and to me, that's real grade deflation.</p>
<p>The problem with including schools like Alabama and UCR is that they admit a certain portion of their student population that is not well prepared for college work. Their 6 year graduation rates are about 55% and 66% respectively. Many students drop out because of low GPA and others graduate close to the minimum. </p>
<p>One may want to look at peer schools, and in so doing Chicago falls toward the bottom for average GPA, but even that is misleading. GPA is also known to vary greatly between departments at most schools. A preponderance of one type of major or another can sway the schools overall GPA. Further, the issue is not really addressed by comparing GPA's, but is also reflected in the concept of how much work a particular GPA entails. A 3.5 at one peer school may require less work than a 3.5 at another. This is why for comparison purposes Chicago is often likened to MIT & CalTech in terms of student work per GPA achieved rather than to some of its other peers.</p>
<p>I think part of the reason that the schools you say have grade deflation like Alabama have low average GPA's is that the students aren't as smart. You can't simply look at average GPA as a measure of grade inflation. It only makes sense to do so when you are comparing schools of a similar caliber.</p>
<p>I'm not sure I would categorize the students at one university or another as smart or not as smart. The difference lies more in the preparation certain students have as compared to others. I have seen plenty of very smart, yet underprepared students in my lifetime. The missions of universities also differ. Often state universities have a mandate to accept a broader array of students than do many privates resulting in more "false alarms," but picking up more "hits" as well. These hits would have been overlooked at the top tier schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A con of UChicago is their ****ing admissions department!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I really did lol'ed reading this. Good one. I hope this 'con' is enough to make accepted students not enroll :)</p>
<p>And I think 65% graduatiing with more than a 3.25 is nice, definately higher than what I expected after reading everyone argue how difficult Chicago is. I'm not saying Chicago isn't difficult, but I guess the academic atmosphere helps, or forces, students to do better than they normally would. The admissions department tries to find students who genuinely enjoy learning and assuming they do their jobs right, then its expectable for students to have good GPA's even though its hard. </p>
<p>Nonetheless 65% having more than 3.25 just sounds wrong to me. In my silly college most professors try to have the class average be a 75, which is I think a C? A 3.25 is just less than a B+. While I agree that the students at my college aren't as 'motiveated' or 'prepared' (trying to be PC here), as Chicago students, the professors genearally force these departmental rules. They also have quotas, so only an X percent ( I don't know the exact figure) may get an A, so even though some students may think got higher than an A (93.00), they may be given an A- due to the high number of A's. It's really unfair but thats how it is. Is it like this at Chicago?</p>
<p>jacknjill,
It can depend on the department, the class, and the professor. You'll learn pretty quickly that there are few hard-and-fast rules at Chicago. Barring something totally egregious (e.g., failing everyone) grading is largely left at the discretion of the professor, probably under the assumption that they know best how to grade their students. There are very broad guidelines they might have to follow, but none that can't be bent at least a little.</p>
<p>Chicago Admissions absolutely deserves to be made into a notorious laughingstock among its peers. Then maybe, just maybe, they might get their act together.</p>
<p>i say.. if u can't afford uchicago now.. go for grad school, that's what i want to do! they don't have a public health major but they have a biostatistics program for grad school! (no one really has public health undergrad) (only JHU and USC)</p>