<p>Yes, cobrat, and we get that certain ethnic groups think that way too - but thinking that way is UNHEALTHY and is not something to be encouraged. Trust me. I did it for years, and was devastated at my first and only B- (in my major no less). </p>
<p>Yes, I graduated with a sparkling spangly impressive GPA and got into what was at the time the #1 grad school in my field of choice, but I was not emotionally well served by thinking of myself only as a success if I got an A and as a failure if I got anything else. So really, I would - and have - discouraged that line of thinking in my kids. Being neurotic if you get less than straight A’s is not a good way to be - it doesn’t matter how sparkling of a career or grad school acceptance letter you have.</p>
<p>I think some people are stuck in the old “look to the right, look to the left” model in which curved grades are used to weed out people who can’t hack it in the challenging courses. If you think in terms of this model, then you assume that if everybody in a course at Harvard gets an A, that As are being given out to people who can’t hack it. This could be true, but it’s also possible that everybody in the class can, and does, hack it. Harvard eliminates the vast majority of those who can’t hack it in the admissions process.</p>
<p>At any school, professors should be teaching to a certain level, which is determined by a variety of factors. If students who choose to enroll in that class have the ability to perform at that level and do the work to earn an ‘A’ how is their accomplishment diminished by a preponderance of 'A’s in the class?</p>
<p>I agree with poetgrl as the the reason for grades.</p>
<p>I don’t see that grading in one circumstance maps over to another. I can see having a college class where all of the students are hard-working and master the material…and end up with A’s. Or another college class where all of the students incur the professor’s wrath for being lazy and all get C’s. I’ve been on the receiving end in both cases. Curving works when there’s a huge variation in the caliber of student and/or the amount of effort the students put in. It’s also a good way to “correct” grading when the professor gives tests that are waaaay too hard. Curving to the highest (or even second highest!) grade is something I’ve been on both sides of. </p>
<p>As far as grading on a curve at work, depends on the employer and work environment. Ranking is an aggravating, frustrating, by definition imperfect tool, but when cuts and layoffs are in the offing or raises are being apportioned there needs to be some way to decide who gets what end of the stick.</p>
<p>Agreed! I posted about this earlier. And Hunt now in post 262 addresses it as well. In a very selective school, I can see how a lot of kids get an A (like the course in question at Harvard had half the class obtaining an A) because even if a course IS rigorous, the kind of student at a school like that tends to be a high achiever who works hard. Just because a student earns an A doesn’t mean the course was not rigorous! My kid attended very selective colleges and grad schools and got a lot of As because she busts her butt. She would say these were rigorous courses and not guts at all.</p>
<p>yes I know, but also just not at “elite colleges in general”</p>
<p>at any school at all, regardless of the SAT, GPAs of incoming students - professors are teaching to a certain level… I see no more reason there can’t be classes at the least competitive schools where most students earn and deserve an ‘A’ than at the most elite</p>
<p>unless we want to argue students at less “elite” institutions aren’t as hardworking as those at the “elites”?</p>
<p>From what I’ve read, it’s more that grad/professional schools and corporations in GPA obsessed occupations want undergrad professors/colleges to make a clearer distinction between the Excellent genius-types, above-average, and everyone else so they could cherry-pick more from the former and the best of the second-category. </p>
<p>Coming from an elite school…even an HYPSMC isn’t enough…they want the very best of the best as they perceive it. </p>
<p>Much ink has been spilled on this very issue in publications ranging from Chronicle/Inside Higher-Ed to the WSJ/NYT with many grad/professional school adcoms and corporate executives voicing such sentiments.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If the grad school is an academic type grad school Masters/PhD program, keep in mind that the grading system is such that the average GPA curves much higher. </p>
<p>In many Masters/PhD programs:</p>
<p>A - Respectable good</p>
<p>-A - good</p>
<p>+B - Respectable passing/passing (Depends on school/Prof)</p>
<p>B - Passing/Barely passing (Even if former, I’ve known many grad students who admitted being counseled by the department chair/graduate dean for this level of academic performance. Some of that “counseling” was quite harsh as they were told that if this level of performance continued…they would be encouraged to leave the program)</p>
<ul>
<li>B and below - Failure </li>
</ul>
<p>The general impression I got when I asked about this “grade inflation” was that there’s an expectation that if one’s in a Masters/PhD program, one should be performing at the B+ or higher levels…especially when several grad students recounted grading actually being easier than undergrad.</p>
<p>Whenever I hear that “nobody gets an A” in some notoriously hard course, my thought is either that the teacher lacks skills–or that there’s something wrong in the admissions office, or maybe the placement system.</p>
<p>Years ago, I taught a high school English elective as an adjunct. This was an extremely competitive, “rigorous” school, and the chair of the English Department earnestly explained to me what they wanted their grades to mean. B- was supposedly the baseline acceptable level of effort and understanding. A was a grade rarely if ever given to more than one student in a class, and it was common (supposedly) for no one to get a straight A. A+ was a grade to be awarded once every 5 or 6 years. You get the idea.</p>
<p>I asked, “What’s your experience with adjunct teachers’ grading?” She answered, “They tend to give grades that are too high. They are impressed by what our students can do , and overvalue it.” I said, “That pretty much sounds like what you can expect from me, too.”</p>
<p>I don’t think corporate America necessarily thinks about “wanting” professors / colleges to make a clearer distinction between the geniuses and the above-average. I don’t think corporate America really thinks about what professors / colleges “should” do at all, to be honest. </p>
<p>Yes, there are undoubtedly some companies that make excruciatingly fine distinctions between the 3.9s and the 3.85s, and there are others who look for a baseline level of smart and make other determinations based on how the student presents in an interview, demonstrates interpersonal skills, etc. Why – just like college admissions! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure - and how they define the very best of the best isn’t necessarily GPA. Leadership, creativity, great people skills, professional maturity – that’s where those things coalesce, and where the but-they-haven’t-properly-recognized-my-intellectual-genius people fall down.</p>
<p>At my kids’ hs, they tried to sell that C wasn’t a bad grade, that it meant average in that class. </p>
<p>unless we want to argue students at less “elite” institutions aren’t as hardworking as those at the “elites”?
The isse with less competitive colleges isn’t hard-working, but what level of prep and learning skills they bring to the class, in the first place. At a school with a C minimum in hs or roughly 1000 M/CR, just how high do we think teaching standards can be? This is an issue with many publics. Obviously, it doesn’t include STEM. Obviously, they have honors tracks, for a reason.</p>
<p>This is also my complaint about many lesser tier schools- if there are plenty of squeek-ins, what’s the impact on the great kid who chose that school for good reasons? Big fish in a little pond, easy top grades, val from No Name, etc, doesn’t always speak to the academic experience, the quality of interactions with peers.</p>
<p>I was sort of imagining that as a rhetorical question. :)</p>
<p>Why would you imagine students at less competitive schools may be less deserving of’ 'A’s than students at more competitive schools? Because they perhaps aren’t as well prepared as the former? Shouldn’t they have appropriate level coursework available to them, where 'A’s are possible? </p>
<p>Thinking about this takes me back to annasdad’s contention that most students can get the same education most places - which may be true - but is a generalization that doesn’t help the individual student who will benefit from particular resources at a limited number of schools.</p>
<p>edit: cross posted with 273</p>
<p>okay I’ve made more than my fair share of posts here, and will (finally!:)) give someone else a turn.</p>
<p>Okay, I’ve mostly just been following along, reading, made a couple of posts, but sheesh, if anybody wonders why anna’s dad makes these threads:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>talk about your nastier posts, as per usual LFward’s eventual degeneration. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>As for LF’s earlier claim not to mention involvement as an adcom, the number of threads I have seen you post that information on is far more than a few. So, you might want to review your posting history. As much as I know what AD is eventually going to say, I find you will inevitably, always, begin to dismissively post about students. As much as I’m sure that AD’s daughter would be pretty horrified, I’m pretty sure your kids would feel the same, for their own reasons.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, its been clear for a while you, in particular, have an issue with me. Leave it at that. And, it’s been ages since you twice asked me to name the school I work for. I don’t ask what schools your kids attend(ed,) as some measure of your ideas. Nasty, indeed. I post when my experiences allow a comment. Just as I do as a college parent and other aspects of my identity. I’m not an adcom-- maybe I am forgetting so many on CC believe only one person reviews an app: an official, fulltime adcom who, if you believe the myths, can reject you because he doesn’t like your area’s sports team (whole thread including that.) Feel free to skip my posts. Try to skip cracks about my kids.</p>
<p>Anyone can label a school lesser tier per their own definition. I didn’t qualify it. </p>
<p>Btw, I have often said, kids slay their own chances, through obvious issues in the CA- not much different than the challenges we face in updating our resumes. If you feel it’s dismissive, think abut your own comments. The end.</p>
<p>If a private school like an Ivy uses a holistic approach to admission and takes in whoever they please, I’m surprised to see some of the selective schools (including 8 Ivies) support race-based affirmative action.</p>
<p>^^^
LMAO. Somehow I figured this would come up.</p>
<p>LF-
At the risk of violating the taboo against responding to your posts, maybe you could explain the difference between a seasonal reviewer and an adcom. Do you have input on the decision for each applicant? I think it would be fascinating to hear about the process, plus maybe helpful to those applying.</p>
<p>I always assumed (correctly or incorrectly) that with 25K plus applications it could no longer be as simple as a few folks sitting around a table mulling over essays and aps. THere had to be a hierarchy and structure of some kind with various responsibilities. What that structure and process looks like I have no idea.</p>
<p>It’s just a question. No ulterior motive. Seriously.</p>
<p>I don’t think this is likely anymore, but many moons ago I was a student reader for Columbia’s architecture grad student. Each application was cored by three people - one student, two professors. The numbers were entered into a card and no one could tell who the student or teacher readers were. One smart kid made themselves look like a nincompoop by apologizing for an illegible essay because they didn’t have access to a typewriter. Aside from the fact, that it’s pretty hard to imagine how you couldn’t manage to borrow one from somebody, you’d think that you’d make your handwriting reasonably legible wouldn’t you? I gave up about half way through. Her father was a very famous architect. I think she either didn’t want to be an architect, or thought she’d slide through on his name.</p>
Curving works when there’s a huge variation in the caliber of student and/or the amount of effort the students put in. It’s also a good way to “correct” grading when the professor gives tests that are waaaay too hard. Curving to the highest (or even second highest!) grade is something I’ve been on both sides of. </p>