3 ms·

> Regardless, why the need for a curve? Your grading system should not depend on which students are present. It can lead to poor students getting a good grade a

by aianus 10y ago

> Regardless, why the need for a curve? Your grading system should not depend on which students are present. It can lead to poor students getting a good grade and smarter students getting a poorer grade - in different semesters, for the very same tests. The distribution of skill between one 300-person calc class and the next is going to vary much less than the difference in teaching styles and exam difficulties. This is exactly why a curve is required -- so that your grade reflects how well you perform relative to others doing the same thing instead of some absolute level of competence that would vary from school to school, prof to prof, semester to semester. Consider an employer or graduate school admissions committee that needs to decide who to interview. Looking at curved grades makes it easy to pick the top X% of students, whereas looking at uncurved grades leaves a lot more to chance (maybe a C was the highest grade in your section, but there was an easier prof the following year where the highest grade was an A).

BeetleB 10y ago
That works fine when you have classes with 100+ students. In the ones I attended, it would range from 15 to 40 (the latter being considered high). Lower numbers tend to be impacted more by noise. >Consider an employer or graduate school admissions committee that needs to decide who to interview. Looking at curved grades makes it easy to pick the top X% of students As an employer, I'm not interested in the candidate's ranking in the class. I'm interested in their skills. While one is often used as a proxy for the other, I do not. As a student, I want feedback on how much knowledge I learned, not how I did in comparison with the class. This was the original purpose of scoring tests. Having gone through the PhD route, I know that "A" grade students who were always focused on the metric of relative ranking rather than knowledge acquired eventually were more likely to do a poor thesis or drop out, compared to "A" grade students who were focused on acquiring knowledge. This was more acute from students who came from top undergrad schools: Very competitive background with heavy curving - and they would take their A as a faulty indicator that they were "doing well". In grad school, even though the courses are more challenging, most professors give A's and B's. Only rarely were C's given. The professors want to focus on learning and theses - grades are a distraction. Suddenly these students were getting A's, thinking they were doing well and not learning much. Their internal barometers were measuring the wrong thing, so their research suffered.
- aianus 10y ago
  > As a student, I want feedback on how much knowledge I learned, not how I did in comparison with the class. This was the original purpose of scoring tests. My university automatically attached our grades to all internship applications. It's pretty clear the purpose of grades (other than pass/fail) is employer or grad school evaluation, not for student feedback. For better or for worse.
  - BeetleB 10y ago
    Which is why in grad school, many professors subvert this by never giving C, and only giving B's if you're fairly poor. They lost the battle for undergrad, but grad school (at least in science/engineering) is still their domain.

by aianus 10y ago

BeetleB 10y ago

That works fine when you have classes with 100+ students. In the ones I attended, it would range from 15 to 40 (the latter being considered high). Lower numbers tend to be impacted more by noise. >Consider an employer or graduate school admissions committee that needs to decide who to interview. Looking at curved grades makes it easy to pick the top X% of students As an employer, I'm not interested in the candidate's ranking in the class. I'm interested in their skills. While one is often used as a proxy for the other, I do not. As a student, I want feedback on how much knowledge I learned, not how I did in comparison with the class. This was the original purpose of scoring tests. Having gone through the PhD route, I know that "A" grade students who were always focused on the metric of relative ranking rather than knowledge acquired eventually were more likely to do a poor thesis or drop out, compared to "A" grade students who were focused on acquiring knowledge. This was more acute from students who came from top undergrad schools: Very competitive background with heavy curving - and they would take their A as a faulty indicator that they were "doing well". In grad school, even though the courses are more challenging, most professors give A's and B's. Only rarely were C's given. The professors want to focus on learning and theses - grades are a distraction. Suddenly these students were getting A's, thinking they were doing well and not learning much. Their internal barometers were measuring the wrong thing, so their research suffered.

aianus 10y ago
> As a student, I want feedback on how much knowledge I learned, not how I did in comparison with the class. This was the original purpose of scoring tests. My university automatically attached our grades to all internship applications. It's pretty clear the purpose of grades (other than pass/fail) is employer or grad school evaluation, not for student feedback. For better or for worse.
- BeetleB 10y ago
  Which is why in grad school, many professors subvert this by never giving C, and only giving B's if you're fairly poor. They lost the battle for undergrad, but grad school (at least in science/engineering) is still their domain.