<p>tell him to eat ****</p>
<p>works every time!</p>
<p>I bet he's just saying it to weed out the underachievers.</p>
<p>See if you can talk to someone who's taken the course before and see if it's true, if you don't want to approach the prof (I'm assuming you go to a small school if there's only one section of a required course, so you should be able to find someone pretty easily). Also check Rate My Professors.</p>
<p>I bet you go talk to him though, and he totally laughs and says that he was trying to get rid of people who wouldn't work hard. One of my professors does something similar for upper level discussion and reading seminars.</p>
<p>yourfire's got a point. I've had similar experiences with professors who announce their class is far beyond the level it's number would imply. Usually the classes ARE harder than usual, but typically they're still manageable, just not a cakewalk!</p>
<p>You can report him, but chances are he's taught this course many times before and the rest of the department knows that he doesn't give out higher than B+. And you're probably one of many students who have tried to tell on him.</p>
<p>Try taking the course at a local uni if possible. Unless it's some obscure course like Readings in Cuneiform or something that your uni specializes in.</p>
<p>Apumic,
Why would you confuse a subject grade with a percentile ranking?</p>
<p>If he said "earning an A in my class will be the hardest thing you have ever done" that would be acceptable, provided that you met all expectations for the grade. To say I dont give out A's sounds like an arrogant know it all who has no regard for the very students that he is supposed to be teaching.</p>
<p>I think most schools actually have a standard for what a grade is, at least my school does (so, 95% = an A, period). They don't say how hard it has to be to EARN that 95%, but I don't think a prof can just decide that someone who gets 100%can only get a B+ (I mean, you can curve, but I don't think you're allowed to curve in such a way that NOone gets an A).</p>
<p>I say talk to the prof to clarify, and then, if neccisary, talk to the head of the department.</p>
<p>"Why would you confuse a subject grade with a percentile ranking?"</p>
<p>There's no confusion there. Grades ought to measure up to a bell-curve because that is the nature of the human traits grades are supposed to measure (i.e., academic intelligence, work placed into the course, content learned, etc.). If those traits fit a bell-curve (which they do), then grades ought to be dispersed across that bell-curve in such a way as to optimally report where any given individual is on that bell-curve. Placing an A above the 2nd deviation, A- at 2.0>Z≥1.7, C at Z=0±0.3, F at Z<-2.0, etc., for example, would yield grades that actually correspond to ability levels instead of simply giving everyone what they think they should get (inevitably an A, because we all think we're "above-average").</p>
<p>Why don't you just try and prove yourself?</p>
<p>Plus I don't see how it's unfair when it's fair that a friend's philosophy class has an average of 80% while my math class has an average of 63%. Is that fair?</p>
<p>Is your math class curved? Also, what does your friend's class having a higher average than yours have anything to do with the fact that no matter how hard the OP tries he can't get an A? Never mind the fact that a philosophy class is completely different from a math class and taught by different teachers...</p>
<p>Apumic
I respectfully disagree. Of course your example works fine when seeking out the "brightest" in any group. Then a bell curve is warranted. In a subject class where there is a defined syllabus if all the students chose to know the material and they all achieved a perfect score on the required tests then theoretically they all should get an A. It doesnt matter what you "think" you should get, it would only matter what you earned. Percentile rankings (which in my opinion are what you are describing) work fine for selection. Once the group(i.e. the class) is established then the material to be covered should be the basis for the mark without regard to the bell curve. The corresponding bell curve that naturally develops should have more to do with the individual motivation of each student not a predetermined curve that ensures the excellence and failure of a few and mediocre results for all else.
I dont mean to hijack the thread so I will let you have the last word and move on.
Jim</p>
<p>Newstudent, please just transfer out. You obviously go to a crappy fit for you if you can't handle anything that's occurring.</p>
<p>xSteven, that is the wrong answer.</p>
<p>Applying xSteven's logic, everyone who thinks life sucks should just commit suicide. </p>
<p>In other news, the population crisis on earth has been solved.</p>
<p>SBR, that is exactly how I feel! You must be some sort of mind reader.</p>
<p>profs say this kind of stuff all the time. are you a first year student? i am, and had a similar experience with my teacher telling me she only grants As to obscure percentages of her class, such as 3%-6%. i don't think your bio prof is being completely serious when he says such things. college profs just want to demonstrate that the relative ease with which one attains As in high school in comparison to college is dramatic. that's why many see As in college as exceptional, as a college curriculum is far more challenging than that of a secondary school's.</p>
<p>I agree yourfire because he wants students to prove to him they can work hard and acheive that A that he said they wouldnt be able to. He also wants to act tough so the students who think "oh wow, what a jerk" and drop so he is left with the dedicated/committed students.</p>