<p>thats the problem... its just a list of schools for which the author (the website is linked in the first post) could find or was sent sufficient yearly gpa averages.</p>
<p>I think I can speak to the list. I've been to Hampden-Sydney. There is NO grade inflation. They can't afford it.</p>
<p>Harvey Mudd with high grade inflation? I think not.</p>
<p>Only 4 people have ever gotten 4.0 at HMC. 2 of them went crazy (icky story that involves death for one) and 1 is now a prof a at Pomona College.</p>
<p>HMC has no problem failing people if they are not up to par. Generally speaking, HMC students are very dedicated and smart...resulting in not too many cases of low GPA's, which results in a trend to apparent slight inflation.</p>
<p>Having a 4.0 isn't a sign of grade inflation- only a few have done so in Havard history, one in the past 20 years, I believe, and it has had steadily increasing average GPAs. The average GPA is the most helpful, isn't it? HMC seems to fluctuate a lot, but this is the median, not something more useful. The numbers don't make it seem like inflation- it makes it seem like it's been high for years and hasn't changed. Not inflation, just high average GPAs.</p>
<p><a href="http://gradeinflation.com/hmudd.html%5B/url%5D">http://gradeinflation.com/hmudd.html</a></p>
<p>yeah, DRab, you're right. 4.0 numbers aren't a sign of grade inflation. i shouldn't have used that in my argument...it is a null point.</p>
<p>speaking of which, there is a new math prof here at hmc that got a 4.1 (A=4.0), B.S., Summa Cum Laude at Cornell and a 5.0 (A=5.0) , PhD at MIT doing Mathematics Operations Research.</p>
<p>how is this possible? if only i had known she was so brilliant when i had her last semester....!!</p>
<p>What would you have done?</p>
<p>asked her to marry me. :)</p>
<p>nah, umm...i dunno. it just would have been nice to know of her brilliance.</p>
<p>"admittedly, the calculations are far from perfect. but look at the two lists of schools used in the comparison... nearly every private is among the most selective schools in the nation. there are a few good publics... and some quite mediocre ones, too. 260 points may only be 230. but its still A LOT. and class rank is class rank.</p>
<p>either way, i cant imagine comparing the two groups of schools as 'equals' with a straight face."</p>
<p>Look, all you need to do is to compare each school to ITSELF to see the evidence of grade inflation. You don't have to compare between schools. Do you really think that Harvard students are significantly better students now than they were 10 years ago?</p>
<p>Keep in mind that graduate schools discount GPAs from certain schools with rampant grade inflation...</p>
<p>Eh, I don't know. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but I haven't seen any proof about it. Have or seen any?</p>
<p>That number for USC is 4 years old. The most recent numbers I've heard are that the average undergrad GPA for all majors is 2.99. In engineering the average undergrad GPA is ~2.8</p>
<p>Personally, I'm happy there's no grade inflation. It means my GPA actually means something.</p>
<p>Where'd you hear it and how was it collected? I'm sceptical that the average GPA at USC dropped significantly over four years.</p>
<p>I heard that number from a university person somewhere - sorry I can't remember the specifics, except it came from</p>
<p>The newest citable source I know is the daily trojan at - <a href="http://www.dailytrojan.com/media/storage/paper679/news/2005/08/30/News/Research.Finds.Girls.Study.More-971744.shtml?norewrite200606161825&sourcedomain=www.dailytrojan.com%5B/url%5D">http://www.dailytrojan.com/media/storage/paper679/news/2005/08/30/News/Research.Finds.Girls.Study.More-971744.shtml?norewrite200606161825&sourcedomain=www.dailytrojan.com</a></p>
<p>Since there's roughly 50-50 male/female students at USC, that means the average GPA at USC in fall 2004 was about 2.96, so we've actually gone up a bit since.</p>
<p>What a stupid article. I guess taking account the generally stricter grading in techinical courses (which seem to be far more highly populated by men) and less strict grading of non-technical majors doesn't mean anything to them. Sure, the trend is true that women study more than men on average, but some justification in GPA? And USC business, what's the gender breakdown in there (I'm guessing male, and with so many students complaining about the harsh curves).</p>
<p>I'm still sceptical, but it's interesting. I couldn't find anything worthwhile about the report online. I'd be interested in the methodology, and if it really is every undergraduate, but it's something I'll think about.</p>
<p>But that's not the point. The average GPA numbers didn't even come from the men vs. women study, they came from some USC statistics sheet. </p>
<p>Sure it's debatable wether girls study "more/better" than guys, but the numbers don't lie, and they say average GPA of about 2.9-3.0</p>
<p>See my last paragraph.</p>
<p>I'm still confused. There's no methodology, you just add up everyone's GPA and divide by the number of students. I thought you were referring to the gender report, which wasn't what I was trying to say anyway.</p>
<p>Maybe we should all transfer to SUNY-Oswego to get a real education...</p>
<p>Well while grade inflation does exist, higher GPAs at privates may also be the result of higher calibre students going there. It is therefore best to compare private and public schools with same or similar academic profiles of entering students. For example, compare a top public to a top private with a similar range in median SATs and GPAs of entering students.</p>
<p>Don’t compare some unknown state university with a top of the line, ultra-famous private university like Harvard.</p>