<p>
I’d be interested in knowing more about these students who failed classes at Caltech, and those who flunked out. Why did that happen? Was it because the material was too difficult for them to master? Or was there a rigid curve in place that ensured that some students would get low grades even if everyone in the class had a good mastery of the material? If it’s the former, then that suggests that Caltech is really only a good choice for a subset of the people who go there. If it’s the latter, that’s a philosophical approach to grading with which I disagree. I think grading should be based on the degree of mastery of the material, and shouldn’t be a competition. I think it’s absurd that a person’s grades could depend on the luck of the composition of the rest of the class.</p>