<p>how do grades in college work? say there's a huge class of like 500...how many people in that class on average would get a 4.0? what about a class of like 80 people?</p>
<p>also, what is standard deviation and how does it help decide your grade? how many standard deviation above the average must you be in order to have a good chance of getting a 4.0?</p>
<p>also, when people say they got an A in a class, what does that mean? 4.0? 3.5? what's an A in college?</p>
<p>Grades really depend on the school. some schools will give out lots of A's (ie, Harvard) some will give out hardly any (ie. work forest). Generally, an A is a 4.0, A- is 3.7, B+ 3.3, B 3.0, B- 2.7, etc. etc.</p>
<p>Yeah, my school only gives out A's, B's, C's, D's, F's. There aren't any +/-'s.</p>
<p>As and A-s usually make up somewhere between 25-35% of grades, usually. Generally, one standard deviation should be enough for an A (I think...)</p>
<p>Tells you what the letter grades mean on the 4.0 scale and on the 100pt scale.</p>
<p>I wouldn't worry to much about standard deviation in terms of grading. You get what you give. So if you work hard in class to get a high grade then you'll most likely end up getting a high grade. That's just how it is. Some people can get away with not doing much work and getting high grades but it's much harder to do that in college than in high school.</p>
<p>Normally college grades will be scaled differently for each class, dependant on the professor. When I was an undergraduate, after each exam I compared myself to the average in the class. If I was around the average, I could reasonably assume I was hovering around a B or so. If I was significantly above the average or a 'curve-breaker', I knew I was doing well and that I would likely be in the A-range.</p>
<p>It's very hard for new college students to get used to the fact that they need to evaluate their grades based on class averages. Each professor uses a different scaling scheme to determine where the average will fall on the letter grade scale, so it's useful to talk to the professor at the beginning of the semester to feel out how he/she determines the curve.</p>
<p>It depends on the professor you'll have. At the beginning of the semester, in each course, the professor will either give you, or make you print one from the internet, a copy of the syllabus for the course. On the syllabus, there's usually an overview of the course, its requirements, a list of assignments, a schedule, and a breakdown on how grades for the course are calculated. (i.e. if grades rely only on exams or are homework, quizzes, and attendance factored in as well as whether the course grades are curved in any way) This breakdown will usually be in percentage form(i.e. 50% exams, 30% homework, 10% quizzes, 10% attendance). With this information, you can easily predict your final grade as you get your scores on class exams and homework assignments back.</p>
<p>thx for the info guys! is it impossible to get a 4.0 in college?</p>
<p>im not going to get a 4.0, and wouldnt even try beause i think i learned perfection isnt a good thing, but im just curious as to if it is even possible. im guessing though its completely dependent on the school and classes you take, right?</p>
<p>freshman and sophomore year possibly but as u get further on courses tend to get harder</p>
<p>Do most good schools, like Harvard, that give out A's really do give out the A's because of the students or they just want the students to have A's on the transcript, so that their graduates get the upper hand when looking for jobs? Or is it because the students at the good schools are really that smart and really do get A's. I mean Harvard IS Harvard. </p>
<p>I know Wake Forest is a top school, but how come it gives out low grades?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I know Wake Forest is a top school, but how come it gives out low grades?
[/quote]
Let's just put it this way. In 2001, Harvard reported that over 90% of its students graduated with Greek Honors and the average GPA was 3.42. They tried to "improve" this by limiting greek honors to only 60%. Their efforts didn't work and the average GPA until at least 2003 remained the same (I couldn't find anymore data). This is because Harvard classes give nearly 50% of the students in the classes As.<br>
Now, Wake in comparison has a 2.8 average GPA and roughly 30% of students graduate with Greek Honors. At Harvard they just give out a lot of A's. Here at Wake in most classes a few kids it seems will get As. Also some of our teachers use err harsher grading scales (ie: in my poli sci class an A was a 96 and above). I just like to think that we hold ourselves to higher standards than those ivy league elitists :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Grades really depend on the school. some schools will give out lots of A's (ie, Harvard)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is simply not true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let's just put it this way. In 2001, Harvard reported that over 90% of its students graduated with Greek Honors and the average GPA was 3.42. They tried to "improve" this by limiting greek honors to only 60%. Their efforts didn't work and the average GPA until at least 2003 remained the same (I couldn't find anymore data). This is because Harvard classes give nearly 50% of the students in the classes As.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That 60% graduate with honors does not demonstrate that Harvard gives out plenty of As. Last I checked, latin honors is not a 4.0, which means that most students with honors graduate with less than a 4.0. Moreover, since, usually, honors is bestowed to students with a 3.5 or above, one could conceivably graduate from Harvard without having ever earned an A. </p>
<p>The only claim your evidence can support is that Harvard is generous with B+s and A-s; however, this would fail to distinguish Harvard from, say, Yale or Georgetown, who are also generous with the B+s and A-s they distribute.</p>
<p>And I don't think Harvard or WF use "Greek honors," unless "magna cum laude," "cum laude," and "summa cum laude," are Greek terms.</p>
<p>so not all college classes are graded on a curve? in the classes ive taken so far only a couple people get A's since its based on a curve. the avg gpa in one of my classes has to be a 2.6</p>
<p>Everything depends on the professor.</p>
<p>The weight (4.0 = A, 3.0 = B, etc) doesn't change. However, calculation does. Here are some examples from all of my classes:</p>
<p>-Algebra: Gave trivial points for homework, but about 80% of the class was based on tests. Homework was really there to boost a few points if you were between two grades or to hurt people who didn't complete it.</p>
<p>-English II: The lowest paper was dropped from the total score. So if someone got an A, an A-, an A, a B+, an A, another A, and a D, that D wouldn't be a factor and the student would get an A.</p>
<p>-Intro to Psych: This class was curved. Whoever got the highest percent on the test curved it. So if I get a 78% and nobody does better, I get the A. The other grades are based on a bell curve, so if the next highest out of a pretend five student class is a 71%, he would get a B; the guy with the next highest (63%) gets the C, and so on. There was also one paper in the mix here that wasn't curved so it could boost grades.</p>
<p>-Public Speaking: Rubrics defined the grading system. It was set up so that you couldn't really get below a B in the class as long as you put some effort into your speech.</p>
<p>-Gym: Easy class. Show up, get an A. If you miss or you come unprepared (i.e. wearing a shirt and tie to the weight room) you lose points. I got 100% in this class with no problem.</p>
<p>-Ed Foundations: This one was straight-up, but most of the emphasis was on observations and their writeups. The observations were actually worth more than the midterm and final combined. This class was pretty easy for most people although you did have to set up a lot outside of class.</p>
<p>-Chemistry: Tests were worth twice as much as homework. A ten point assignment is worth ten points, but a twenty point test was worth forty. Grades are calculated and whoever has the three highest scores will have their scores averaged. If the scores out of 100 are 95, 90, and 85, the class is then curved to be out of 90.</p>
<p>-Ed Psych and Child Psych (same prof): The tests were out of 60 but there were usually 65 (give or take one) questions on the test. The curve was theoretically built in. You could also get bonus points if you wrote a really good paper (I got 5 extra on mine, mostly because of extra drawings I used to support the stuff). These classes had mostly A's and B's for final grades. It is also worth noting that even though my school has + and - grades, this professor didn't give them. A 90% is an A, not an A-; an 89% is a B, not a B+. It helps if you have a 90%, 80%, etc but hurts the 89%, 79%, etc folks.</p>
<p>-History: I really am curious as to how this guy came up with his weight. Originally the two regular tests were to be 30% of the grade each with the final 40%, but everyone did poorly on the first one. I got an A despite getting a C+ on the first exam, so I am guessing he adjusted the weight of the tests based on how people did. This class didn't yield many A's. Most of the students who came to the study session seemed to get around a B-, so I am guessing he factored in participation as well (I asked a lot of questions with the hope that it would count...trust me, if you are interested in the material the prof may bump up your grade!) This guy did curve tests, but I could never understand his curve.</p>
<p>Computer Basics: This one was straight-up. Tests were half written and half computer based. Homework was worth a few points but not nearly as much as a test (think 5 points versus 50). You could get bonus points here if you corrected true/false questions to make them true on tests.</p>
<p>High School Chem: Not college, but worth mentioning. This guy would curve a test from time to time if the students did poorly, but the key in his class was participation. I got 5% extra in points once from participation (plus asking questions/coming in for help during study hall led to me getting better grades anyway). This guy also never collected homework and the only grades other than tests were labs. Tests were always 30 points uncurved, labs were always 5.</p>
<p>High School Physics: Another HS class worth pointing out. He did the same thing as the HS chem guy with participation except he would curve every one of his tests by a few percent, I think based on what he felt the difficulty of them was after reading them through again. He had homework, but one of the more interesting assignments was that he always made us correct our tests. Labs and homework were all worth different amounts of points but were usually around 5. This guy also gave out as many as 5 bonus points to students on the bubble after taking their finals. I got 90.0000% as a result of this, so I got an A. (My HS didn't have + or - grades)</p>
<p>
[quote]
And I don't think Harvard or WF use "Greek honors," unless "magna cum laude," "cum laude," and "summa cum laude," are Greek terms.
[/quote]
yeah i don't know why I put that. </p>
<p>Also, if there are that many students graduating with LATIN honors, then their GPAs have to be higher. While the stats I have show that Harvard gives out A's, the grades they give out are higher in general: thus the high GPAs. You make the point that this means Harvard just gives out lots of A-'s and B+'s, perhaps, but it is a fact (at least a few years ago in 2002) that almost 50% of their grades were A's!
I don't care if Yale and Georgetown do the same things. There obviously is something wrong when 50% of the kids earn A's in a class and the average GPA is a 3.4. And why do these schools do this? to help their students get into a good grad schools/land jobs. Once you get into a school like Harvard it is difficult to fail out, as the academic environment is extremely catering (so I suppose the same must be said of Yale and Georgetown). However, most graduate schools are well aware that GPA's from Wake Forest will be lower and this is taken into account.</p>
<p>Yeah desk, it does suck with no grading on a bell curve. In my intro to psych class (which was not supposed to be that hard) the average grade at the end was 2.66.</p>
<p>^ and don't forget about W&M :P</p>
<p>so you can sympathize Mightymeals :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
ou make the point that this means Harvard just gives out lots of A-'s and B+'s, perhaps, but it is a fact (at least a few years ago in 2002) that almost 50% of their grades were A's!
I don't care if Yale and Georgetown do the same things. There obviously is something wrong when 50% of the kids earn A's in a class and the average GPA is a 3.4.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're committing the logical fallacy of division: that 50% of the kids in a school earn As does not mean that 50% of each course/class gets As.</p>
<p>And no, I don't think grad schools or professional schools take into account the "grade deflation" at WM or WF. There are only a few schools that have this luxury with post-grad institutions: Reed, MIT, Swat, Caltech, and Chicago.</p>
<p>the specific quote is:
"47.8 percent of the grades received [were As]"
I took this to mean out of every single grade in every class given out by a Harvard professor, near 50% of all of those grades were As.</p>
<p>Also, I don't see anything wrong with handing out As to 50% of the class. Systems of grade distribution are absurd: what it really means is that papers are not graded solely according to their own merits, but are also graded in terms of standard of distribution imposed by the administration. That, in my opinion, is not a positive aspect of academia: it encourages competition, and it means that papers that are legitimately As might not earn that grade.</p>
<p>If the paper is legitimately an A, that is, if it is an A according to its own merits, then it deserves an A. That Harvard chooses to grade according to merit doesn't mean they are being generous in any sense.</p>