<p>First of all, Im a man. So interesting you think I'm an "open minded feminist." Of course, men can be feminists, but I have a feeling thats not what you were guessing.</p>
<p>Second of all, most people seem to think im closed minded. Not that I am....but whatever. Im certainly not a "leftist" hippie type, which is what you seem to have labeled me.</p>
<p>Thirdly, mgcsinc noticed something I didn't and hit the nail on the head. You have no fricken clue about how the university is run.</p>
<p>Finally, it really ****es me off when you all start talking like "brown experts" when you may have spent a week at most there.... Get a grip, you guys don't know anything compared to some of us who have actually lived there for a few semesters. Leave the definitive claims up to the current students, not the rising frosh.</p>
<p>Absolutely nothing! Bullmoose thought he was slamming me.....I dont even know what he is talking about. I think hes confusing me with somebody else.</p>
<p>Just pointing out that while I may have hit the nail on the head (and I'm happy abou tthat, because it's so rare that I do), I wasn't trying to put Bullmoose down. It is very common for people to have no idea about the nature of academia before college, or even after they've been there for years. It's really worth reading about.</p>
<p>I think if you read through my comments you'll see that i am not making absolute statements about Brown, rather about higher education in general. Someone was talking about grade inflation, and thanks to various experiences and perspecives I have a sufficient enough understanding of the issue to post in on a stupid discussion board. Not having spent a year in college doesn't make me blind to obvious inconsistencies in education. So I screwed up the contract thing; that's not central to my point. </p>
<p>GH: If i'm not mistaken, The feminist reference came from a previous discussion we had on Political Correctness in another thread; i know that you're male. I tend to dislike it when people who have implied that i am closeminded to condescend me when i post becuase supposedly i dont know what i'm talking about and have no right to make "definite claims". Contribute something to the conversation instead of trying to look like whatever you were trying to sound like with that first comment.</p>
<p>it's like a poorly conducted trial everytime i post these days.</p>
<p>I'll repeat this: a family friend who is a professor is extremely skeptical regarding claims of grade inflation. Grade inflation is a very hot topic these days, and academics say that it's on the rise. However, in his experience, grade inflation seems to have a direct relationship with selectivity. The liberal arts college that he teaches at (not a top liberal arts college but still very good) has, like most schools, seen its selectivity rise steadily over the past years (and he has been teaching there for about 25 years now). He says that the student body of 25 years ago is nowhere near the level that it is at now. Students come to the college prepared and driven to suceed. For a while, he felt bad about giving much better grades than he used to, but then he concluded that it would be wrong to punish students who are doing the work very well simply because academe is buzzing about grade inflation.</p>
<p>Yale's acceptance rate in the 1930's approached 75%. Today, it stands at about 10%. Grades may be rising, but, if it were without valid cause, to the degree speculated on this thread, the postgraduation prospects would present a far bleaker picture. Remember that these schools have applicant pools that are seventy to eighty percent 'qualified' to do the work. The threshold for great humanities papers probably rests on framing an issue in a new way or reaching a different (and proven conclusion). I get the sense that a "B" may now represent what was a "C" in some arenas. So, in that sense, grades may be rising. However, I would argue that the quality of the work is as well. Does anybody find it hard to think that 90% of Harvard's students could qualify for honors? I don't. However, they had to narrow that down. At Princeton, I would wager the move to keep A's at 25% is still well above where it has been in the 1950's or 1960's reflecting administrative recognition of the fact that their student body has presented higher-quality work as admissions have toughened.</p>