<p>I heard NYU Stern has a pretty tough curve too.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Most of the time doesn't CURVING help?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes. In most science and engineering courses, you will learn to passionately love the curve, because a straight-scaled class doesn't mean everybody gets A's. In science and engineering, a straight-scaled class often means everyone get's C's.</p>
<p>i had a class where the curving was just for middle grades. Getting a 90 guaranteed a letter grade of at least A- and getting below a 60 guaranteed an F. In between 60 and 89, the letter grade distribution was curved. The curve bumped by grade up from a C to a C+, so I thought it was great.</p>
<p>" heard NYU Stern has a pretty tough curve too."</p>
<p>Yes, a 92 in econ is often a B/B-</p>
<p>
[quote]
How would one go about getting a negative grade? Would a blank exam count as a zero?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, the professor wants to eliminate any guesses on the exam so the professor penalized anyone who had the wrong answer (just like the SAT). Therefore, if you get questions wrong and none right then you get a negative grade. YES, it would better to leave it blank. Of course no one actually leaves the test blank cause no one will be satisfy with a '0' hence people actually do make guesses on the exam and it is pretty common to get grades lower than '0' on the exams</p>
<p>::I keep hearing that a teacher can give only 3 A's per class. That's the real garbage. What if four people get the highest grade in the class, say 92's. How does he decide which 3 get A's and which one gets a B+? Poor old Bobby Williams gets a B+ because he's at the bottom of the alphabet.::</p>
<p>No, even if the grades were curved so that there are only three A's, if four people tied for the highest grade, they would all get A's. That's how curves work.</p>
<p>How the curve works is dependant on the teacher really, but usually the average grade is set to a C or C+ and the other grades distributed accordingly. I personally like the curve because I'm always on the B+/A- border doing straight percentage, and when the class average is low - I'm pretty much guaranteed an A. And usually if the average is high they will just nix the curve and do straight percentage. I've only had one professor where that wasn't the case... he was strict on the curve. Average = B-.. the average for the first midterm was 37/40 (really good right?)... but that was a B-, a 40/40 was an B+.. he was a jerk.</p>
<p>I've had classes curved down as well. You were top 10% in high school... congrats, everyone at your college was top 10% too. You can't all be top 10% of the college.</p>
<p>If you had mostly straight A's in high school, would you have mostly straight A's in college? Is it possible to get a 4.0 with the curve?</p>
<p>If you're at the top of every cruve then yes it is. However that is going to be hard to accomplish.</p>
<p>How do you get on top of the curve? Do you need to do better than everybody in your class and sabotage other people's work?</p>
<p>Do not expect a 4.0 in college, especially if you go to a competitive one. It really isn't even possible at some.</p>
<p>You get an A by simply doing better than everyone else (which is how it should be)...no "sabatoging" required.</p>
<p>The point of curving is to help standardize grading--despite the professor and his teaching abilities. Schools that actively give lower grades (that deflate grades) or that curve down make their grades and honors a little more meaningful, as 4.0s are given out like candy at some schools, whereas they are a lot harder to come by at others. Getting a 4.0 at one of the harder schools shows a lot more than at the former. An example of the problem would be when Harvard was giving 90% of its graduates Latin honors, which they've since fixed. Having a Latin honors designation wouldn't mean much of anything if almost everyone was getting it.</p>
<p>Wow I thought Harvard was suppose to be hard?</p>
<p>I'm sure that it is hard...the point is that grades weren't properly differentiating student's effort. You should be able to look at the school to determine the difficultly level and the grade to see how the person performed at that difficulty level.</p>
<p>But a school like Harvard, where almost EVERY student got straight A's in high school. Maybe they're all smart enough to deserve that A. They probably get smarter every year too.</p>
<p>Besides, wouldn't the better grades be better for the student for employers and other people? Don't the school want their student to suceed in the real world instead of only a few who beat the curve?</p>
<p>Getting straight As in high school means absolutely nothing in college. Being smart also doesn't mean you "deserve" an A--the only way for an A to mean anything is to reserve it for students who put in a lot of extra effort beyond what is required and what others put in. </p>
<p>As for succeeding in the real world--I would rather have a lower GPA and a degree that was worth more than a 4.0 in a school where it was easy to get one. Schools that regularly increase the difficulty of their classes and make it more challenging to achieve grades better prepare you for success--your GPA doesn't.</p>
<p>l33twArR10r...based on this thread and the ton of others you made, you seem to know very little about how college works.</p>
<p>But let me answer your question directly: if you get a 4.0 in high school, and you go to a competitive school where most people got 4.0s in high school, then you'll probably end up with a 2.5 to 3.5 GPA assuming you don't get into partying and that you have good study habits and time management.</p>
<p>Now again, that all depends on the school you go to. But, like the person before me said, it is much more important to get a degree at a good school and have only a 3.0 GPA than it is to have a 4.0 GPA at a lower calibre state school. While a higher college GPA may help you somewhat in your career search, once you establish yourself at a job and start moving up the payroll, no one is going to care what your college GPA is.</p>
<p>"...assuming you don't get into partying..."</p>
<p>So you're saying you can't party and get good grades? </p>
<p>Some of you guys go a little overboard with the stereotypes...</p>
<p>I think its fair to say that people who can't stop partying and work -- those who go out EVERY night when they should be studying are at a serious disadvantage for getting good grades.</p>
<p>::So you're saying you can't party and get good grades?</p>
<p>Some of you guys go a little overboard with the stereotypes...::</p>
<p>I think there is an important distinction between partying from time to time and "getting into partying." People partying almost every other night are much less likely to get good grades.</p>