4 ms·

Why does this make any sense? Generally speaking, students at top universities are intelligent and hard-working. Their talent is not normally distributed, and

by danhak 6y ago

Why does this make any sense? Generally speaking, students at top universities are intelligent and hard-working. Their talent is not normally distributed, and this is increasingly the case as admissions becomes hyper-competitive. Not to mention, students self-select into courses to which they are most suited and likely to perform well. If all students in a particular class master the subject matter, why should some students be forced to receive failing grades? Should the purpose of higher education be to rank students on increasingly marginal criteria or to...educate?

mc32 6y ago
Because the average score should be a 2.0 GPA. If that university has a better fount of students then an A at that uni is better than an A at another uni. Don’t worry, institutional reputation is already a thing, so that’s not a problem. Grade inflation means you have no idea how poorly of well someone is because everyone gets a “participation” score.
- danhak 6y ago
  You just used different words to re-state the same assertion that achievement should be shoehorned into a normal distribution regardless of students' actual performance. Why? > Grade inflation means you have no idea how poorly of well someone is because everyone gets a “participation” score. As I argued above, a high GPA is not a "participation" score, it is an achievement score. It just happens that achievement at top universities is generally high across the board. And frankly, giving everyone an A is a far more desirable outcome than pitting students against each other in an artificially competitive and high-stress environment where the alternative is group study and collaboration.
  - kortilla 6y ago
    > It just happens that achievement at top universities is generally high across the board. Happens at lower universities as well. Turns out the cause isn’t “high achievement” but instead it’s entire generations of students that treat anything lower than an A as a failure and subsequently pressure admin to make the prof back off.
- ummonk 6y ago
  Why should the average score be a 2.0 GPA, especially given that many courses require grade of C or better in pre-req courses?
- ardit33 6y ago
  wut, that is a failing grade in most universities.... Under 2.0 or 2.2 GPA (depending on your school) and you are on academic probation. If you have an academic scholarship, you must maintain at least a 3.0 (B) average.... Which seems fair. The true average is somewhere between 2.5 and 3.0.
sien 6y ago
It's what is done in Australia. It works pretty well. Failing grades are not handed out this way, if you demonstrate a basic understanding of the material you pass. But actually getting an HD, the top mark, is only for the top 20% or so from each class. It means in Australia for a technical subject if you get First Class Honours you can get into a PhD program and get a scholarship and get through in 3 years if you work hard.
kortilla 6y ago
> rank students on increasingly marginal criteria or to...educate? You can still educate perfectly fine while making the assignments and tests very difficult. Do students attend schools to get A’s or to get educated?

by danhak 6y ago

mc32 6y ago

Because the average score should be a 2.0 GPA. If that university has a better fount of students then an A at that uni is better than an A at another uni. Don’t worry, institutional reputation is already a thing, so that’s not a problem. Grade inflation means you have no idea how poorly of well someone is because everyone gets a “participation” score.

danhak 6y ago
You just used different words to re-state the same assertion that achievement should be shoehorned into a normal distribution regardless of students' actual performance. Why? > Grade inflation means you have no idea how poorly of well someone is because everyone gets a “participation” score. As I argued above, a high GPA is not a "participation" score, it is an achievement score. It just happens that achievement at top universities is generally high across the board. And frankly, giving everyone an A is a far more desirable outcome than pitting students against each other in an artificially competitive and high-stress environment where the alternative is group study and collaboration.
- kortilla 6y ago
  > It just happens that achievement at top universities is generally high across the board. Happens at lower universities as well. Turns out the cause isn’t “high achievement” but instead it’s entire generations of students that treat anything lower than an A as a failure and subsequently pressure admin to make the prof back off.
ummonk 6y ago
Why should the average score be a 2.0 GPA, especially given that many courses require grade of C or better in pre-req courses?
ardit33 6y ago
wut, that is a failing grade in most universities.... Under 2.0 or 2.2 GPA (depending on your school) and you are on academic probation. If you have an academic scholarship, you must maintain at least a 3.0 (B) average.... Which seems fair. The true average is somewhere between 2.5 and 3.0.

sien 6y ago

It's what is done in Australia. It works pretty well. Failing grades are not handed out this way, if you demonstrate a basic understanding of the material you pass. But actually getting an HD, the top mark, is only for the top 20% or so from each class. It means in Australia for a technical subject if you get First Class Honours you can get into a PhD program and get a scholarship and get through in 3 years if you work hard.

kortilla 6y ago

> rank students on increasingly marginal criteria or to...educate? You can still educate perfectly fine while making the assignments and tests very difficult. Do students attend schools to get A’s or to get educated?