<p>It won't be an outlier if it reduces median GPAs to a B+. On the contrary, it will still be relatively close to the top of the pack, just not at the very top.</p>
<p>If they use criterion referenced tests such that no one could get an A or everyone could get an A, and the criteria are high, I would have no problem with the grading. the problem comes in where work that used to warrant a B is given an A.</p>
<p>"A couple of years ago, my S took a math course at Harvard. When announcing final grades, the prof noted that the class had done very well and, 'since this is not Princeton, I don't feel limited to giving As to only one-third of the class.'"</p>
<p>interesting, since P just instituted this policy LAST YEAR.</p>
<p>"As much as it seems a good idea, I think it will hurt Princeton students admissions chances at the most competitive programs."</p>
<p>Agreed. The admin say they attach a statement about the grading policy to every transcript, but I'm not sure that is going to make a B- from Princeton equal and A- from Harvard. Hearing about the policy from the inside, a few observations:
1. The university is clearly doing this in order to boost its reputation with the Rhodes, Marshall, etc. The most recent statement by the academic dean included a reference to this. What's ludicrous is that they are missing a basic point: Harvard and Yale both take highly promising first-year students and groom them for these big fellowships. No one I know has heard any evidence that Princeton does the same. They could save a lot of aggravation by taking a lesson from H and Y in this case.
2. What is happening is that for the most part, the older students are getting more of the As. Therefore the frosh are often in courses where exams are curved downward. Many of the profs are announcing at the start of the semester that only 20 percent or 18 percent will receive A-range grades.
3. The grade has become a moving target. If "too many" students do well early on in a particular course, the next exam, or the final, is a killer. I have spoken to students who received A-range grades on their tests and a B in the course. If all the written grades are "too high," then the student gets knocked down on the basis of "class participation." It is very demoralizing. And I am not saying this because my kid is not doing well. She is doing very well, but the emphasis on grades there at this point -- and, especially, the focus on making sure not "too many" students do well -- is really unpleasant. Contrary to what some have said here, she and others were NOT grade grubbers in hs. They loved to learn and insisted on challenging themselves. I have to say that any time I have been a teacher, if my students were capable my goal was to make sure they all did well.<br>
4. Unfortunately, for any student applying to professional or grad school, the current policy really discourages taking any chances in subject areas where they are inexperienced. And because first-year grades are not shielded in any way, it works against anyone from a mediocre or poor high school.<br>
5. I really hope Dean Malkiel gets a job as a university president elsewhere very soon, taking all the credit she wants for this escapade. The way this was rammed through was bizarre. I already know one student who loved Princeton but is applying ED to Yale because when visiting she heard so much about grades. I'm sure she's not alone.<br>
6. The most impressive thing about this whole situation is that although Princeton students are being directly pitted against one another, they remain a friendly and collegial group. It's amazing. I give them credit. </p>
<p>As you can tell, I feel strongly about this. It is so contrary to my own educational philosophy. I'm all for setting a very high standard and challenging very able students to meet it. That's very different from inviting 14 students to sit around a seminar table and letting them know from Day One that only 3 of them will get an A-range grade, no matter how well they do, because the admin has created a zero-sum game.</p>
<p>f.scottie:</p>
<p>But the policy was so widely covered before it was instituted.</p>
<p>Aparent:</p>
<p>I agree with you. This is essentially the reasoning behind my S's math teacher's remarks. He truly believed that he had a very strong class that particular year, and that a large number had done very well. So hang the curve. If many students truly deserved As, why should they be given Bs?<br>
As you note, the policy is most likely to affect large classes, which tend to be the classes freshmen and sophomores are more likely to take. Yikes!</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>...Princeton students are being directly pitted against one another....<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Welcome to the real world. "Pitting students against one another" is curve grading in a nutshell. Especially at big universities, grading on a curve, often a remorseless curve, is the norm.</p>
<p>Coureur:</p>
<p>In large classes, a curve pretty much happens on its own as the class is likely to be fairly mixed. You are more likely to see more As in upper-level courses for a variety of reasons. 1. the students are self-selected and more committed to doing the work as opposed to "having to take this course because it's required." 2. they are better prepared and more likely to be majoring in the field in which the course is offered. I've also read comments to the effect that in upper-level, small classes, students are more likely to develop a close relatiship with the instructor resulting in better work on the part of the student and a greater disposition to give good grades on the part of the instructor.</p>
<p>Many of these factors applied in my S's class, btw.</p>
<p>Yikes, indeed, aparent. I hope you have registered your feelings, & the reasoning behind them, to the administration. I hope P students are doing the same.</p>
<p>I have always felt -- & my own teachers & teachers of my daughters have believed -- that a grade is for the most part an "absolute" standard. It is fixed by the teacher and/or by quantitative measurements where those are possible & appropriate. In my older D's h.s. class, about half the class were truly A and A- students. (Their college acceptances also reflected such achievement.) In other classes at the same school, the top half of the class has earned an average GPA of B-, graded by the same set of teachers.</p>
<p>Wake up, college administrators! Where is your academic integrity? Who cares what College X or Y thinks? More to the point, why arbitrarily punish current & future students for the past sins of teachers who have grade-inflated? If you were truly purists, you would review & adjust the past grades, not rob current students of rightfully earned recognition. You would also adhere to a number system relative to the rubrics completed & not completed for every project & exam -- providing greater objectivity & encouraging accountability. Even my daughters' lame elementary school did the latter. A grade based on 3 elements of a paper, 3-5 elements of an exam, & 20 occasions of class participation (including team projects) is more difficult to dispute, bend, appeal, or doubt. And even in this same elem. school, there have been occasions when no one in a class, for a given project, deserved an A at all!</p>
<p>If P is looking outward to the reputation factor, they might want to think about the fact that the public generally is more cynical about quotas (of any kind) than they are about grade inflation.</p>
<p>Marite -</p>
<p>I'm not defending curve grading. In fact I view applying a curve to a small class to be an error that bespeaks huge ignorance of statistics and the need for a proper sample size to achieve a legitimate normal distribution.</p>
<p>I was just pointing out that pitting students against one another is not some new tragedy that has arisen from Princeton's policy. It is already a simple fact of life, often a deliberate fact of life, at hundreds of other universities.</p>
<p>Coureur, okay, got it.</p>
<p>As I suggested, though, if Princeton wants to reduce the number of As that are given out, the place to look would be in upper-level courses; except, for the reasons I outlined, those As may very well be merited. It reminds me of the scoring on AP-Calculus BC vs. AP-Calculus AB. There are lots more 5s on the BC than on the AB because the BC takers are better prepared and more confident in their ability.</p>
<p>The whole Princeton policy seems to me misguided.</p>
<p>"Harvard and Yale both take highly promising first-year students and groom them for these big fellowships. No one I know has heard any evidence that Princeton does the same."</p>
<p>What basis do you have for this statement? H & Y don't groom promising first year students for these fellowships. They really don't. Along about junior year, some individual profs and masters start doing this, but it's not as organized as your post suggests. My oldest kid knows several people who are Rhodes/Marshall winners from H, Y, and other schools and most didn't think about applying until at least late sophomore year. It's really the big state schools, e.g. U of Oklahoma, that do this. West Point and the Air Force academy do too--actually have a course for which you get credit. Nothing like that exists at H or Y. </p>
<p>" I'm not sure that is going to make a B- from Princeton equal and A- from Harvard." A B- from Princeton is NOT the equivalent of an A- from Harvard, so no one should think it is. (I'm not sure if it still does, but Princeton used to give A+s, while H & Y do not, which means it's easier to get a very high gpa at Princeton...or at least it was while it was giving A+'s. A Princeton gpa is out of a theoretically possible 4.33; at H or Y the highest possible gpa is 4.0. The real difference is that it is possible to have a 4.0 at Princeton, even with one or two B's. That's not possible at H or Y.) Moreover, at least for law school, the LSDAS report shows the median LSAT of students from each UG college, the median gpa of the students applying to law school from each UG college, as recalculated by the LSDAS, and an approximate ranking of each applicant from each UG among those applying from that UG, based on gpa. So, if there really is a substantial difference in the grading policies of Princeton and Harvard, it will be self-evident from the LSDAS reports. </p>
<p>" Unfortunately, for any student applying to professional or grad school, the current policy really discourages taking any chances in subject areas where they are inexperienced." I don't understand this comment. The emphasis on gpa in admissions discourages students at any university which doesn't allow students to take any courses P/F from doing this. I don't see how switching from 37% to 31% A range grades is really going to make this dramatically more difficult. </p>
<p>"And because first-year grades are not shielded in any way, it works against anyone from a mediocre or poor high school." I don't know about med school, but the LSDAS calculates a separate gpa for each academic year. Grade trends do matter. Moreover, it's not necessarily the case that students from mediocre high schools get worse grades as frosh. They often place into lower level courses and thus aren't competing head to head with students who are better prepared. In any event, this is not a problem unique to Princeton. </p>
<p>"I already know one student who loved Princeton but is applying ED to Yale." Yale is EA, not ED. The student can still apply to Princeton regular decision. The reverse is not true, since P'ton is ED. I suspect this may have something to do with the desire to compare financial aid offers. </p>
<p>Seriously, a change in policy helps not only those few Tigers who are in the running for a Rhodes or a Marshall, it helps those applying to med and law schools and grad schools too. If 41% of all Princeton grades are in the A range, it's hard to figure out who are the best students . Scores on LSATs,MCATs, GMATs, etc., end up determining who gets into the best law, med, biz programs. This hurts good students who are not stellar test takers and helps mediocre (by Princeton standards) students who are good test takers, especially those who can afford to take expensive prep courses.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If 41% of all Princeton grades are in the A range, it's hard to figure out who are the best students . Scores on LSATs,MCATs, GMATs, etc., end up determining who gets into the best law, med, biz programs. This hurts good students who are not stellar test takers and helps mediocre (by Princeton standards) students who are good test takers, especially those who can afford to take expensive prep courses.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a fair point to make. But I doubt that selections such as Rhodes and other ultra elite screens are unable to sort through the A's currently given. </p>
<p>Frankly, it is a poor "business" (or competitive) decision. Students are so concerned with grades these days, and are so focused (forward looking) that they are not going to jeopardize their grad admissions chances by having a few gratuitous B's dropped on them by a quota-constrained faculty. Such students already have a unique set of personal reasons which can lead them not to choose Princeton over other competitive schools (geography, social structure, football team which loses to H and Y, ED instead of EA, etc, etc, etc. )</p>
<p>So, It seems quite odd for Princeton to provide the most competitive applicants an institutionally unique reason to not choose it. Whatever good feeling the faculty,administration, and trustees might have about it will soon dissipate as the application and matriculation fallout shows itself (IMHO).</p>
<p>Marite's comment about going it alone is operative.</p>
<p>I believe Princeton's policy is well-intentioned. Grade-inflation does a disservice to the students at Princeton. If 41% get As, that means they aren't being challenged enough. One point, IMHO, of going to a top school is for an academic challenge. Straight A studnets in high school should expect to get a B or even C occasionally because no one can be an expert or excellent at very subject. As for graduate admissions, most good schools and programs recognize that a high GPA at certain schools means more. Students at Princeton need to be challenged-encountering academic difficulties will only make them better students and learners.</p>
<p>I find this thread quite strange. I intend to apply to Princeton ED for many reasons including FinAid, the very strong maths program, and because I really like the Princeton setting. </p>
<p>To get into a place like Princeton, you are already the cream of the crop so to speak. Now if students really do that well to deserve an A, why shouldn't they get what they deserve. Who can really say only 35% of the class can get A's. In my view that is absolute crap.</p>
<p>Think about this- I'm from Australia. It doesn't take much to get into the top university here. 1st class honours ( the highest available) is given based on your marks. These are mostly raw marks and once you meet the minimum you get your honours. There are no limits to how many people can get honours. But the main argument is that although there are no limits, the number of honours students hasn't increased by much over the years because the quality of the student body hasn't increased by much. Unless you go out of your way to make sure 80% of your students gets A's then I don't see a problem if you just let those who deserve it to get A's and etc.</p>
<p>I am not an expert on the US system but my observations show an obsession with GPA. It's like as if everything is based around it. Pity there isn't a weighed index for GPA so that those from a more compeditive environment and student body have more credit for their GPA. If Harvard deems that 55% of their students deserve A's and Honours than so be it. It is after all HARVARD!!! Its the same case with Princeton. We are not talking about high school. We are not talking about any random state uni or collge. We are talking about the few TOP Universities in the world. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if 90% of students at MIT get A's in Maths. Would any of you contest that as being unfair?</p>
<p>Many people on this thread seem to give the bad impression of sour grapes. I know in many places A's are hard to come by but considering the difficulty and strength of the student body at these places and comparing it with Harvard, Princeton, and Yale really isn't fair. I can understand how many of the people on this forum have different experiences and views on this topic so many of you will not agree with my views.</p>
<p>My school used to have a nortorious reputation for bring up grades towards the end of the year (just in time for exams). We changed it to a similar grading on the curve. The reaction is predictable as it has made the class so much harder and it really did create mistrust and tension in the classroom. Dispite all the negative impacts the increased competition did bring out the "best" in many people. Rather than just doing enough work for an A many students really put in 110% overdrive. Of the 17 students who managed an A in Physics, not one of them didn't go into overdrive and not one of them didn't have a passion for physics. The grade curving really did bring out the best in many people.</p>
<p>The problem with applying this model to Priceton is that most people there at any other non-ivy institution would get top marks. What is there to stop a C average student at Princeton from being just as good as an A average from say UC-berkeley? Yet undoubtly people would look more favourable at a UCB with A's than a Princeton grad with C's even though in truth they can be of the same quality.</p>
<p>But then personally- I wouldn't mind grading on the curve because simply I love a challenge. I may sound arrogant but I honestly would love to compare and compete against some of the brighest people in the world. I would love the challenge to get A's. I accept that I may not get the grades I would like but in the process I know it will bring out the best in me. :)</p>
<p>Anyways, thats enough writing for tonight. I gotta go play rugby tomorrow morning.
Alex</p>
<p>EDIT- I'm amazed at how much I just wrote. A little shorter and I might just have an essay I could submit in my application :p hehe</p>
<p>
[quote]
Many people on this thread seem to give the bad impression of sour grapes. I know in many places A's are hard to come by but considering the difficulty and strength of the student body at these places and comparing it with Harvard, Princeton, and Yale really isn't fair.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know if you're saying what I think you're saying, but if you are I have to disagree strongly. </p>
<p>These schools have very talented students, but there do exist other schools with comparable students.</p>
<p>I believe I read that the best predictor of future success is being rejected by HPY. Suggests something is happening to those equally as talented students (at UCB?) who are rejected that does not take place at HPY.</p>
<p>The equally successful stat is for students who are accepted to HYP but choose not to enroll.</p>
<p>Jonri, the young student in question is not applying for financial aid and she was explicit about having been turned off by P's grading insanity. And I have heard directly from students at H and Y that they know students groomed for the big fellowships. Looking on H's house sites, I see counseling to prepare for application to these is right up there from the time the student enrolls. I know a student at H myself who was encouraged to apply from the time he was a sophomore. That this counseling exists does not preclude anyone's deciding to apply later on without it. I read an old article in the Yalie Daily that students there think H does a better job with providing ongoing counseling in this regard. However, Y seems to be improving. As for P, there is no equivalent. Ya know, I was trying to say something nice about H and Y. I think they do a good job in this area (and in counseling for professional schools, btw). I think P's administration is muddled on this point, and frankly the whole enterprise strikes me as a way to polish up a dean's resume. And I'm not usually a cynical person.</p>
<p>What I object to is that the topic of grades is now front and center in one class after another, with graphs and stats on the class distribution being handed out, etc. How anyone could think this would be a way to nurture young intellects is beyond me. It builds a grade-grubbing environment, particularly with the grades' being a moving target. My d loves P but definitely not this aspect.</p>
<p>Aparent:</p>
<p>Just a small correction. Since students move from dorms to Houses only in their sophomore year, they can only start being encouraged to prepare for Rhodes and Marshalls in their second, not first year at Harvard. With Yale's 4 year residential college system, the situation may be different.</p>