<p>So, what do you think is better? Personally, I like the x/100 average as it more accurately depicts a students strength. For example, a student A may get straight 80's in high school and student B gets straight 89's. They both would have the same 3.0/4.0 gpa but out of 100 it would really show the stronger individual. Just like how a 90 average isn't the same as a 99 average but they are both 4.0's (if they were straight A's that is). What are your opinions on this?</p>
<p>“They both would have the same 3.0/4.0 gpa but out of 100 it would really show the stronger individual.”</p>
<p>At my school an 80 is a 2.7 and an 89 is a 3.3. How are those the same?</p>
<p>“Just like how a 90 average isn’t the same as a 99 average but they are both 4.0’s (if they were straight A’s that is).”</p>
<p>Again, at my school a 90 is a 3.7 and a 99 is a 4.3. How are those the same?</p>
<p>Plus… this point is mute, because your school sends your official transcript along with your GPA. Your transcript includes all of your grades from all of your classes. The only schools that might not look as much at this are large state schools, but for the majority of your applications, the school will consider your transcript.</p>
<p>A lot of schools have it as A = 4, B = 3, etc… which is where the OP was getting at</p>
<p>I personally think that the 4.0 GPA system is pointless and innacurate. There is no reason to turn a number grade into a letter grade back into a number grade (i.e. 95 = A = 4.0). Besides, it’s possible to have a person with a higher 100 point average to have a lower 4.0 average (I could prove it mathematically, but I don’t feel like it right now :P), even though the person with a higher 100-point average was smarter.</p>
<p>Finally, 4.0 scales range from school to school. Some schools have just ABCDF, others have +/- in addition to ABCDF (A-, C+, etc). Sometimes a B is 92-85, other times its 89-80. In my school, an A is a 3.75, A- is 3.5, B+ is 3.25, and so on. So a D at my school is a 1.5 but it’s a 1.0 at any other school. With a 100 point scale, it’s a matter of percentages, what percent of the material you knew. Percentage is constant from school to school, because a 90 on a test at one school is a 90 on a test at another school.</p>
<p>AUgirl, if a 99% is a 4.3 at your school, your school’s not on a 4 point scale. Also, I believe the word you were looking for is moot.</p>
<p>That said, I’d rather quartile rank be used as a measuring stick, because gpa is a dimensionless quantity until given the rest of your class as a reference point.
Example:</p>
<p>The median unweighted gpa at John Smith’s school is 3.7. John has a 3.3. John’s rank would only be in the top 75% of his class, not impressive at all.</p>
<p>At first glance John Lennon’s 3.01 is nothing spectacular. Then, we see that the median unweighted gpa at John’s school is a 1.3. Suddenly John’s a god.</p>
<p>My school doesn’t do x/100 because so many teachers can’t grade things that precisely. For example, I get tons of essays back that just say “A,” not 96. Many teachers like to include class participation in grading or presentations that are hard to grade so precisely. </p>
<p>I agree that there should be a distinction between an 80 and an 89–that’s why there should be pluses and minuses. But when you see each individual percentage, I think it implies more objectiveness in grading than actually exists.</p>
<p>But when it really comes down to it, it doesn’t matter too much since colleges see a school profile that explains the grading system. You may still get a little screwed over one way or another, but probably not enough to make or break your college process.</p>
<p>AUGirl, I would argue that the point isn’t “moot” at all. Maybe at your school it’s a 2.7 for a B- and a 3.3 for a B+, but I think most high schools don’t factor in pluses and minuses for unweighted GPA. From what I’ve heard, most colleges will recompute GPA to their own system by looking at your transcript (or just factor in your class rank-- which is more accurate). To them, an A of any kind is a 4.0, a B is a 3.0, etc. So while you are right that colleges look at your transcript to determine GPA, how you extrapolated the process is quite contrary to how they actually do it.</p>
<p>I would love a percentile system, but I hate +/- in its current state because just 1 A- screws you out of a 4.0 and the teachers are like “It’s still an A, why should I feel sorry for you?” and then they bump an 89%er up to a 93. It annoys me.</p>
<p>The x/100 system does a good job of gauging your performance level within the A/B/C/etc. ranges. Some teachers do assign numbers arbitrarily, especially when it comes to participation points. But seeing your grades and your GPA as a percent gives you a better idea of where you stand. The whole letter grade system doesn’t appeal to me.</p>
<p>The potential vice to it is that it causes for some frustrating situations when students have X9.999 and teachers won’t bump it up. It increases competition also.</p>
<p>Oh well at my school once you get a .5 in your average your percentage is rounded up. Also, we get letters for mid term reports only but actual scores for the three end of term reports each year. On the mid-term reports the +'s are for showing effort and the -'s for a lack of effort but only 1 percent of the teachers actually use them lol so basically an 81 can get a B+ and an 88 a B- based on the teacher’s discretion. And on the reports they rank you in your class by your averages so a 88 average can come 1/40 but if the school was actually suppose to rank using the 4.0 system that person might get screwed over in the process lol There are si many differences with the two systems and while I do agree with the facts mentioned above that some projects presentations etc. are just hard to put an exactgrade to some teachers choose to use a rubric like say out of a possible maximum mark of 20, 10 marks are for content, 5 for presentation (pics, cleanliness etc.), 3 marks for correct use of grammar and 2 marks for organization. When a rubric is used it limits te chance of bias and favoritism and also allows the person/group who presented the project/presentation to see where they went wrong and fell down in the marking scheme.</p>
<p>The 4.0 scale is far superior because there is not enough objectivity in grading. If everything was a multiple choice test, the 100 point scale MAY be superior because almost everything would be objective, but even then, the wording of questions and their answers would have to be grammatically perfect.</p>
<p>On written tests, essays, oral projects, and other assignments that are graded subjectively, Student A could get a higher grade than Student B solely because the teacher likes blue better than orange. It’s totally arbitrary.</p>
<p>Also, the 4.0 scale leaves room for people to pursue interests outside of school rather than being a reclusive nerd and studying for 9 hours a day to get 100’s their tests/quizzes/whatever other assignments they might have. It promotes more overall well-roundedness.</p>
<p>The best scale would be to do an unweighted GPA using a 10 point no +/- scale to send to colleges and then a x/100 weighted GPA for class rank.</p>
<p>So that would mean that:</p>
<p>90-100=10
80-89=9
70-79=8
60-69=7
50-59=6
40-49=5
30-39=4
20-29=3
10-19=1
0-9=0
??</p>
<p>Also, on a 10-point scale, what would be good to universities? 9+?</p>
<p>No, I mean, for colleges:
90-100=A, 4.0
80-89=B, 3.0</p>
<p>but for class rank, it’s your % average with bonuses for enhanced difficulty.</p>
<p>We don’t have APs or Honors since we are international however, we don’t have IB either, so all courses are weighted the same (out of 100), with no bonus marks.</p>