<p>CheshireStripes: ...how exactly does one go about being a "bad test-taker" ? are professors in college really going to buy that excuse?</p>
<p>CheshireStripes...good question. I feel that no matter how "bad" a person is at taking tests, he or she should be able to learn material from reading a book, listening to lectures, watching movies, researching, memorizing, etc, and then use that information to communicate the knowledge gained to the best or his or her ability. So many kids half-a** everything they do and don't even realize what hard work is. </p>
<p>I consider myself a terrible test taker when it comes to multiple choice. Yet every single one of my AP Modern Euro tests had a multiple choice component. I had to study harder for this class than I have ever had to study in my life. I didn't realize how hard I could work until I took this class. It was so difficult, and all I could manage was a B+, despite my best efforts. The questions were a mixture of ones written by my teacher who has a PhD in European History, and the AP Board's previous tests. Because I was using a college-level text with questions coming straight from it, I have no choice but to believe this is an acceptable way to grade. Each semester consisted of about 4 tests and one major research paper. That is it. No homework, no projects, no extra credit. If a student fell behind in the reading, then that is too darn bad. </p>
<p>Where I see schools getting themselves into trouble is in the scale. My school's grading scale is what most would consider difficult. A+=99-100, A=96-98, A-=93-95, etc. The grades a difficult to obtain in the first place. Many schools don't fail kids until they reach 60% or lower! As I stated earlier, in an English class, one kid may write an amazing essay, and the kid next to him turns in a piece of illegible garbage. The first kid gets an A+, the second kid gets a B. Everyone in the class seems to get an A or B. In my opinion, unless there was some sort of placement test to get into this class, wouldn't it just make logical sense that a class of 25 could not possibly have 25 kids who deserve an A? Where are the kids getting C's? C means average. Are you telling me that in a standard, freshman year English class, EVERY SINGLE KID is above average? If this is true, what is the point of even attending school? If we are all above average for four years, why not go straight to college? It seems all we do is sit around proving how smart we are, so why waste time?</p>
<p>I got a C+ on my report card a couple times after working hard to raise it from a D or worse (math...). I was happy to get a C+ in Algebra 2. Even though I worked hard in class, had my meetings twice a week with a student tutor, and my weekly visits to get help from various math teachers, plus hours of self-study, the truth was, I was still no where near as good at math as my fellow students. I am average at math. AVERAGE, meaning I deserve a C. The C put a dent in my GPA, but at least it didn't delude me into thinking I should be an engineering major! </p>
<p>The point of getting grades is to give the student an idea of what needs improvement and what should be commended. An average American high school with a graduating class of 300 should really have no more than 5 people with straight A's. And that is being generous. These perfect report cards give us the idea that we are all MENSA material, and we aren't!! </p>
<p>If it's not grade inflation, the only other explanation is that the schools are simply too easy. Another reason why other countries keep beating us! My guess is that it is a combination. Easy grading + low expectations leads to us falling behind.</p>
<p>if you think college confidential is a good indicator of normal hs students, you are very wrong...</p>
<p>kyle5000 that is so true</p>
<p>college confidential has 2 things
1) really smart kids who obviously care about school because they care about college
2) annonymous users-- so grades and test scores aren't always true when posted </p>
<p>i get frustrated sometimes at how perfect these posters may seem, but in reality, i have just as good a chance as any one of them. </p>
<p>in terms of grade inflation/deflation.... i hate to say it... but the only thing stopping the majority of kids from getting a high gpa is laziness. don't tell me that your class is hard or your teacher is unfair....everybody has hard classes and unfair teachers</p>
<p>Maybe you should spend the time you waste whining on CC learning Math skills so you won't get a C+ in Math next time. Just a constructive comment.</p>
<p>Unwritten - It's very possible that someone can be a bad test-taker. If you get clammy hands, and a clenched fist in your gut feeling when taking a test, you might be very nervous. This nervousness can escalate into blanking out or rushing to pick wrong answers. As Citygal stated, some people are just bad at multiple choice. Not everyone can be perfect as many people on this board seem to think they are.</p>
<p>Okay, so what do you suppose these people are going to do in college?</p>
<p>Not really my problem, is it? I don't share their nervousness. I was just bringing up a point.</p>
<p>okay, well then no obviously their grades shouldn't just be brought up. that is part of the problem and most definitely is inflation. they should either accept their grade or fix whatever their problem is because in college most professors aren't going to believe that excuse or care.</p>
<p>Colleges know about private schools and their reputation. Isn't that the reason why your parents shell out tons of money for it in the first place?
A 3.5 at Andover or Exeter is not going to be viewed the same as a 3.5 at maybe a lower ranked school or (God forbid) a public school.</p>
<p>Yes, that is correct. But I also have a huge problem when a 3.5 at my school is so much harder to obtain than a 4.0+ at the public school in my town. (don't argue with me about this, I'm not just saying the public school is easier than my school because my school is private)</p>
<p>Much is expected from those to whom much has been given.</p>
<p>I'm just curious to how grading should/could be regulated. It's still going to come down to the teachers...all of whom have different opinions, personal standards, and feelings towards their students.</p>
<p>MaryCeleste: much is expected from those to whom much has been given.</p>
<p>good point. </p>
<p>what bugs me though is that if your parents work for a living then colleges expect perfection. go to a bad school, qualify as "disadvantaged" and adcoms will look the other way at ones laziness</p>
<p>quote: "what bugs me though is that if your parents work for a living then colleges expect perfection. go to a bad school, qualify as "disadvantaged" and adcoms will look the other way at ones laziness" </p>
<p>That isn't the case at all. Yes, Admission Reps go out of their way to find minority applicants who meet the minimum standards for admission, but there are standards (the only exception might be for gifted football players and other sought after sport stars) . </p>
<p>And there are minorities from disadvantaged backgrounds who work hard, exceed and do very well (neuro surgeon Dr. Ben Carson, as one example). Not fair that they have an advantage in admissions over the rich, white, boy from the North? Boo hoo. Not fair that some of the rich, white boys from the North also have the advantage of their senator father/mother/uncle/cousin or whatever, but it is a fact of life and I don't see nearly the whining about that as the minority issue.</p>
<p>i think ur just upset that you have a bad GPA.</p>
<p>Now, from my observations, everyone, including my self, with a 4.0 uw has very good SAT, SAT subject tests, and AP scores. Which means that the 4.0 wasn't a freebee. Yes, some classes at one school may be easier than a class at another school. But just because I go to a public school and got an A in AP class and a private school kid got B, it doesn't mean his class was harder. I got 5s on my AP tests. My ap stats teacher said that the AP test is a "universal ruler". It is a standard. </p>
<p>You keep complaining about high gpa kids; well, everyone kid with a 3.8+ gpa has got majority of 5s on AP tests, so it means that they didn't just have a walk through the part time in public high school...</p>
<p>taekwondo...where exactly are you getting your information on AP scores vs. GPA from? There are definitely people with 4.0's who have 5's on their AP tests, but I would bet there are more students with 4.0's and 3's on their AP tests. </p>
<p>And once again...since when is 3.6 a bad GPA? So many people have 4.0's now that a 3.6 seems like a slacker GPA. It is so twisted.</p>
<p>if you go to the "what are my chances?" post, you would see that most kids with good GPA has high AP scores (mostly 5s and 4s). 3.6 is decent but it isn't good. From preschool to freshman high school, I went to a private school. But I switched to a public school begining sophomore year. My GPA stayed the same and I feel I studied the same amount. not much difference. Its off topic, but a public world is more like a model of society. at the private school, i never had the oppurtunity to interact with some type of students at public schools. In reality, public school is so much harder than private school. There r so many distractions and misleading paths.</p>
<p>I got 5's on every AP I took (I took 7) but one: AP French 5. I got a 4. </p>
<p>3.6 is a good GPA. Students are rewarded too easily for mediocre work, which is so many people think 3.6 sucks. </p>
<p>My private school was more diverse than most public schools. It has the highest diversity rate in the state for private schools. </p>
<p>I consider myself lucky that I didn't have to deal with the types of distractions at public schools, but with private school a whole new set of distractions is present. The competition is fierce, with the caliber of students attending so high, among other things.</p>
<p>Did you even get a 5 on the Calculus one...or did you not take that one?</p>