3 ms·
Maybe grading is not stack ranking for you, but for other professors it openly and explicitly is. And it's hugely problematic to have inconsistent grade scales
by fjjfjfj 3y ago
Maybe grading is not stack ranking for you, but for other professors it openly and explicitly is. And it's hugely problematic to have inconsistent grade scales between professors. When two Intro to Statistics professors teach the same curriculum but one routinely fails 0-5% of the class and the other routinely fails 40% of the class and grades matter for getting internships or into grad school, that matters and the 40% professor is probably just on an ego trip. I found out the hard way that this is why there was a waitlist to take math classes in the engineering department but no wait list to take them in the math department, because in the math department a D was passing and you could get into a graduate program with >2.5, but in the engineering department a D was failing and you weren't getting into grad school with below a 3.2. Yet engineering department administrators were recommending students take math department classes and not explaining that. You had to figure it out yourself. Usually by going to the honors society's office and asking the students who spent all their time gaming their GPAs.
- hollandheese 3y ago>Maybe grading is not stack ranking for you, but for other professors it openly and explicitly is. And it's hugely problematic to have inconsistent grade scales between professors. When two Intro to Statistics professors teach the same curriculum but one routinely fails 0-5% of the class and the other routinely fails 40% of the class and grades matter for getting internships or into grad school, that matters and the 40% professor is probably just on an ego trip. Intro to Stats: it's vastly vastly more likely that the 0-5% failure professor is not doing their job and is just passing every student regardless of the quality of their work.