<p>8.033 is on that list lol.</p>
<p>its funny, cause I took these screen captures 3 years ago (wow!) without any real intention ever to do anything with them. I think I just thought they were pretty:</p>
<p>8.022 test 1 and test 2</p>
<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/lululiu/Public/pixx/8022test1.jpg%5B/url%5D">http://web.mit.edu/lululiu/Public/pixx/8022test1.jpg</a>
Test 1: average 49.9, StDev 14.7. I believe an A was a little less than a SD above. Of course I threw away the email that told us this. I just remember what my grade was (# and letter), and it wasn't that high lolll</p>
<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/lululiu/Public/pixx/8022test2.JPG%5B/url%5D">http://web.mit.edu/lululiu/Public/pixx/8022test2.JPG</a>
Test 2: average 50.4, StDev 18.9. About the same for A cutoff... relative to SD.</p>
<p>We consistently got emails from professors warning students who were more than 1 SD off the mean grade on a test of failing. 6.001 (the same term I took 8.022) explicitly had a 25% A policy. 50% B, 25% C and below. Perhaps things are changing, at least on the administrative front, if not on the actual administering front. Well, students don't feel it yet, that's what we're trying to say. Oh by the way there were only 2 tests in 8.022.</p>
<p>I think what most people find kind of obnoxious, cellardweller, is that though you mean well, and you've been a thoughtful contributor to the forum, and you clearly have found evidence to support your claims, so your confusion is understandable, but what is frustrating is that somehow you feel like in this particular thread and situation your parental connections to an MIT student (who is in what year and major by the way?), a cursory experience (at best!), along a few minutes of clicking around on the MIT webpage, put you at an authority to disprove 5 or 6 primary sources, recent graduates and current students at the school. I've taken the vast majority of the classes mentioned on this thread, and I'm telling it how I saw it. I mean those curves above? My grades are in there, too. Am I saying every class is curved (in practice if not in theory)? No no no, your daughter could have taken a set of classes that happen not to be curved. But does curving happen at MIT? Oh yeah. As other students have said, usually to help you. The only time when a curve worked against me was 8.033 -- the average on the first test was a 91, I believe. Honestly, I can't care less about whether MIT is "tough for premeds" because I'm not one, and I frankly don't give a crap about whether or not people think MIT is "tough". I hope you don't think I'm (we're) contradicting you in order to embarrass you? Or as some kind of collective joke or brainwash ploy? Surely you must have more respect for us than that. Your list of most conceptually difficult classes are all freshman classes. Whoa there, hold on. How could that possibly be the case at MIT? Is your daughter a sophomore?</p>
<p>I'm taking 8.09 (theoretical classical mech, the II to 8.012's I) right now. 8.012 > 8.09 in conceptual difficulty?</p>
<p>One reason why 5.0s at MIT are more common than 4.0s at Harvard and other such schools is that at MIT, +/- modifiers are not used to compute GPAs. Therefore, an A- is a 5.0 instead of a 4.7. On the other hand, at most schools, an A- is a 3.7 (out of 4.0).</p>
<p>""If difficulty is to be equated with hard it is to get an A, the most difficult courses have historically been:</p>
<p>18.03
8.012
8.022
8.033
5.112
5.60
18.100B"
"</p>
<p>Well, first of all, almost all of these classes would have been taken on pass/no record (if we are talking about historically.) It's not really relevant how easy or hard grading would have been in these classes. Also, many people don't really try on pass/no record. </p>
<p>The one class on grades out of that group was 18.03. I remember the top 15% got A's.</p>
<p>
[quote]
At worst, if a professor violates some grading policy, the professor won't be assigned to teach that class again.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I suspect that the only feedback mechanism to prevent a professor from violating a grading policy is if a student in the class complains to the department.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One reason why 5.0s at MIT are more common than 4.0s at Harvard and other such schools is that at MIT, +/- modifiers are not used to compute GPAs. Therefore, an A- is a 5.0 instead of a 4.7. On the other hand, at most schools, an A- is a 3.7 (out of 4.0).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>OK, I didn't take that into account. If the +/- is factored out, are 5.0s still more common?</p>
<p>My information may no longer be relevant since I graduated almost 25 years ago. I can think of two people offhand who had 5.0s. Both were in mechanical enginering. One had earned a patent on something before entering MIT. Another person I knew had a 5.0 in EE classes but got some non-As in HASS classes. (He took some economics classes which were easier for him to get As in to bring his GPA up.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, given my general understanding of academia and the authority that (tenured) professors hold, they generally have the authority to assign grades in whatever manner they please. This means if they want to curve, they will. At worst, if a professor violates some grading policy, the professor won't be assigned to teach that class again.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
the professor chooses however (s)he wants to grade the class. If the professor wants to fail 90% of the class, the professor gets to fail 90% of the class. The professor may not get to teach the class again, but the professor pretty much gets to do as they please (although they are usually nice people, not *******s out to get you). If your quotes about curving not allowed are right, and my experiences with many classes being curved are right, then clearly some rules are being broken (and this doesn't surprise me in the least).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't claim inside knowledge of MIT grading policies. I just note that grading is considered the responsibility and prerogative of the professor at virtually every college I have encountered. MIT can say whatever it likes about curving or not, it is hard to imagine how it could force professors not to do it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's exactly right, and definitely seems to be true at most schools. The truth is, at most schools, MIT included, the administration really isn't that powerful, particularly when it comes to course policies; professors can and will grade their courses in however way they want, and the worst that can happen is that they may no longer be assigned to teach that course in the near future (which may actually considered to be a benefit by those profs who don't enjoy teaching undergrads). But other than that, what are you going to do to a prof, especially if tenured? This is a problem at most schools, MIT included.</p>
<p>Oh grrr.. so 18.03 is really hard to get an A in? I am taking it next term with Jerison (new?)
If I get an A in 18.02 (even though it is P/NR), what's my chance of getting in A in 18.03?</p>
<p>^^I don't think it is always only the top 15% that get A's. I took it from a guy who had never taught it before I think.</p>
<p>18.03 isn't that hard. Just make sure you actually do your homework. I remember a math prof said you could get away with not doing your 18.02 homework if your smart, but that you really need to do it for 18.03.</p>
<p>18.03 is neither hard nor hard to get an A in.</p>
<p>so, uh, don't worry? Why are you worrying anyhow.</p>
<p>Based on what I've seen for 18.03 at OCW, there is a lot of review and practice material on- and offline. Keeping up with the assignments and doing practice problems should result in having a good grasp on the subject. While this doesn't necessarily guarantee an A, it should provide the foundation for future classes, etc.</p>