<p>Does anyone know of good schools(top 50 unis and lacs) in the northeast or mid-atlantic states that don't practice grade deflation? I don't mind having to work for my grades, but I don't want to basically have to kill myself and my social life just to get a "B".</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Both Harvard and Yale are known for grade inflation while Princeton is known for grade deflation (new policy just instituted in the past few years). I know that at Swarthmore there is very little competition for grades (no grades first semester and never a calculated GPA as part of the transcript) but I am not familiar with inflation/deflation at Swarthmore. </p>
<p>All in all, do not make a decision on whether a school is notorious for grade inflation or deflation. If you are interested in grad school, admissions officers know the academic environment of most well known / academically acclaimed institutions.</p>
<p>Swarthmore has a reputation of grade deflation from what I know through collegeconfidential and just the general consensus of the area i live in. </p>
<p>Also, its important to note that, although entire schools can have grade inflation, it heavily depends on the department's individual grading standards. So its not really fair to put everything under one blanket and generalize (even though its going to happen anyways).</p>
<p>Grade deflation is a badge of HONOR. What it means is they are taking the fluff out of phoney grades and instituting what is truly earned, not that you are slaving to get a B.</p>
<p>Grade inflation is obnoxious and really a misrepresentation of scholarship and achievement. So I would gravitate TOWARDS the grade deflation schools, work hard and see what happens, and then be proud that you got what you earned.</p>
<p>So what your are saying is that when I apply to law schools, these schools will know whether my college inflates or deflates grades? I've read that law school admission is solely based on GPA and LSAT scores.</p>
<p>Can anyone tell me if the following schools inflate or deflate grades? Do any just really give the grades what they are truly worth?</p>
<p>Columbia
Wesleyan
Tufts
Brandeis
Boston U</p>
<p>Also, if you go to a school with grade deflation, doesn't it kinda suck, even if you love the school?</p>
<p>people, please give me your opinions, pleeeease!</p>
<p>I'm going for college visits soon and am trying to find out as much as I can beforehand to make these visits really worth it.</p>
<p>Tanks.</p>
<p>One would have extreme difficulty thinking of any top school that has grade deflation. They either have grade inflation or at best merely a lack of grade inflation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
new policy just instituted in the past few years
[/quote]
A policy that allows 1/3 of grades given to be A's is not exactly grade deflation.</p>
<p>1/3 of grades as As is still higher than many concentrations at places with a reputation for grade inflation.</p>
<p>Of course, one can argue that if there is a set level of achievement expected to earn an A and 60% of students meet or exceed that expectation, what's the point of artificially making As only go to 20% of people?</p>
<p>Are grades measures of what you've accomplished in the course as an individual or are they measures on how they stand up to your peers at the same institution?</p>
<p>^Hey, that's what I'd like to know as well.</p>
<p>Also, some friends have said one has to work really, really hard to even think about getting an 'A' at Wesleyan or Columbia. Oh man!</p>
<p>Here is an interesting chart for you to consider --</p>
<p>recenttrendsindschools2.gif</a> (image)</p>
<p>The above link is from former Duke Professor (of (Hydrology I think) Stuart Rojstaczer's current blog, who originally published his comments in the the Chronicle of Higher Education, which is linked here: The</a> Chronicle: Daily news: 01/30/2003 -- 07</p>
<p>His own comments about the surprising way he had become the defacto 'grade inflation czar' are here: Stuart</a> Rojstaczer source material page</p>
<p>Looks like you ought to be targeting Brown or Harvard. Out west, Pomona.</p>
<p>Apparently BU has bad grade deflation, too.</p>
<p>The Feb 20 newspaper for the Claremont Colleges has a front page article on the subject.</p>
<p>Warning - It takes a little while to load. I don't know how to have excerpts show up here.</p>
<p>The article even has a graph showing the rise in gpas for 8 colleges over the last 40 or so years.</p>
<p>There are a lot of good rhetorical arguments to make against grade deflation being a problem, but here's an interesting point:
schools</a>' mean LSAT</p>
<p>Btw, Brown's median LSAT is 166.</p>
<p>So Brown and Harvard, two places with "notorious grade inflation" also have two of the highest, if not the highest, median LSAT scores in addition to having students with higher GPA.</p>
<p>Does that mean their GPAs are still artificially high, or are does that mean that perhaps it is relfective of higher average achievement in those courses?</p>
<p>I think the smart answer is there's little evidence to support either, so judging schools on inflation or deflation is kind of a mess. Brown's structure (fair amount of courses mandatory pass/fail and taken pass/fail, no pluses or minuses) drastically changes how GPA works here (in fact, the university doesn't officially recognize GPA as a metric) so it makes it hard to compare to other schools.</p>
<p>cdover is right, I've heard a lot of people comment that BU has grade deflation, even from a professor who formerly taught there. </p>
<p>But if you're applying to schools like Columbia, Wesleyan, etc, I'd imagine that BU is more of a safety for you and that you'd be able to handle the courseload.</p>
<p>The issue identified in the link two mules posted to the Pomona College newspaper is this: How can the very best students... those that clearly differentiate themselves from the other 90-95% of the students in a class, by virtue of their intelligence, creativity... even dedication to the work... be identified when they, along with another 35-40% of the class, receive the identical mark of A?</p>
<p>I think it's fine... I was never top 10% at the collegiate level, and truth be told <em>most</em> employers and grad schools don't require or care about top 5-10%, but if I WERE top 5-10%, I'd want that to be reflected on my transcript. At some point, if truly outstanding work is merged in grading with merely "fine work", this will serve as a disincentive to some students who would work just that much harder, make the extra emotional and time commitment to step back to solve a problem from a slightly different angle of approach, because they will not be formally rewarded for such extra special work.</p>
<p>So Dunnin, for you, grades are a matter of comparison to other students and not in comparison to a set expectation a professor has on your learning in that class?</p>
<p>I tend to not like this way of thinking, but I understand where it comes from.</p>
<p>I'm speaking from a practical point of view. An adcom at a graduate program, a recruiter for IBM or a consulting firm.. what if said person wants "the best of the best" demonstrated in some tangible way? They already know that, in the above case, Pomona students are among the very best high school graduates of their year. What if that does not practically solve their problem of identifying the top 5% or 10% <em>from Pomona</em>? If the average GPA at a school is 3.5, this assume on average that 50% of the students in a class receive an A mark.</p>
<p>As an adcom or recruiter, a more differentiated, more spread GPA distribution makes it more likely to identify and reward those students who have performed to a higher level (through any combination of native intelligence, creativity, interpersonal skills, hours dedicated to the work) than their peers.</p>
<p>As I say, I was never among that group of select few. I often wondered how their brains were wired differently than mine, but I can step back to analyze this in a non personally threatening way... the very best deserved to be identified, even if that group does not include me :)</p>
<p>I don't really find it useful to find out that a student is the top 10% of a class. So what? What if the class was not challenging and didn't motivate anyone? What if top 10% still didn't really reach a reasonable standard of knowledge in that course? How do I know that what was taught in the course was in line with the information I'd expect to find in a course like that? How do I know that the 20-30% after that top 10% aren't just as prepared as most candidates are in that particular area, but have some other skill that make them more valuable than someone who's even better in a specific way?</p>
<p>To me, it' sjust not that meaningful. Grades in general are not that meaningful, in my opinion. If the goal of grades is comparison, I think that fosters an atmosphere of extreme competitiveness that I think is detrimental to learning and detrimental to developing habits of working with others and integrating multiple people's ideas and knowledge to have a stronger cohesive whole.</p>
<p>So I guess, from my perspective, most of the time, the best method sets a hard line of expectations for students to meet and if they learn the information you expect them to as a professor that should be an A. If they learn most of the information, but not all, but did well enough that they could be successful using and building on that information in further course work or intellectual exploration, that's a B. If they got the concepts and some of the details down, such that they understood the class but would be unlikely to have a strong enough foundation to continue to have success with further exploration, independent or directed, that should be a C. If they did not grasp the concepts or retain any of the details, they should fail.</p>
<p>But that's my own, personal view.</p>
<p>I think those standards and expectations should be high, btw, but I don't think it matters if 100% of the class meets that expectation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I've read that law school admission is solely based on GPA and LSAT scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Absolutely correct.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So what your are saying is that when I apply to law schools, these schools will know whether my college inflates or deflates grades?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>With relatively few exceptions (such as Swat, Reed, & Chicago), not really. Adcoms will not care if the 3.7 from Harvard (or Stanford) was "easy" in comparison to your 3.3 from 'highly competitive Uni'. The simple fact is that the 3.3 will bring down their USNews ranking (not a good thing), so that applicant better have an excellent LSAT. </p>
<p>Of course one downside with Brown (and other generous p/f schools) is that professional school adcoms will look askance at a transcript that is loaded with p/f courses. Anyone will recognize that Organic chem can be a whole lot less stressful if every other class that semester is p/f.</p>
