<p>That's similar to the grading school at my school, and I absolutely hate it.
We have the following:
A+ 100
A 96-99
A- 94-95
B+ 92-93
B 88-91
B- 86-87
C+ 83-85
C 79-82
C- 77-78
D+ 75-76
D 72-74
D- 70-71</p>
<p>The grade scale at my school depends on the teacher. But usually its the generic:
A: 90-100
B: 80-90
C: 70-80
D: 60-70
F: 0-50</p>
<p>And the in betweens (plus and minuses) are evenly proportioned. </p>
<p>But as long as you get at least an A- (regardless of percentage) it counts as 5 credits in an honors/AP class. At least a B- = 4 credits in weighted class... etc.</p>
<p>If that is the grading scale that is in place, are there very few A's given out? If there is still a normal grade distribution among the students (i.e. a bell shaped curve), then it shouldn't matter what the grading scale is like. I remember in my freshman year, we had a teacher in honors physics that refused to teach the class at an introductory level. So instead of making the material and tests easier, he simple changed the grading scale completely so that a 75+ was now an A range grade. Still, only 2 kids got A range grades that year...</p>
<p>Ours is the same as the one up top, but the point for AP and honors is given on the 100 point scale, rather than the 4 point scale. At our school 98-100 = 4.0
95-97=3.7 93-94=3.5. It sucks. It also doesn't explain that on the school profile.</p>
<p>The absolute scale is essentially meaningless ... what matters is what percentage of students get As/Bs/Cs/etc. Which is tougher ... a scale where 98%+ is an A but 50% of the kids get an A ... or a scale where 90%+ is an A but only 10% of the kids get an A. Comparing the raw numerical scale in isolation tells you virtually nothing.</p>