Originally Posted by JahJahBinks A few thoughts after reading the last several posts:
1. Whether grading system is flawed in Harvard, it is still considered an honor to get accepted by Harvard.
2. GPA is more important for grad job than for job hunting. But many companies have a minimal GPA requirement (usually 3.0).
3. Even if your school isn't highly ranked, if you know how to use all the resources it will still be a rewarding experience.
I don't want to make anyone who went to harvard undergrad angry, but this is just what I heard:
When I went to visit I talked to several students who went there and they said there was rampant grade inflation at harvard. They said the only real hard thing was getting in, not going to school there. THey said it was because a huge part of the student population is legacy. So one part got in because there entire family went there and their grandfather was JFK. THe other part worked their butt off and got in purely on their own merit (not saying legacy students are stupid, just saying that its possible purely on their own merit they would not have been accepted). So then professors have sort of a mental/achievement gap in the class and they have to inflate the grades so half the class doesn't get A's and half the class doesn't get D's. One of the students actually said Harvard was 75% legacy.
Once again, I just heard this from students who went there. I am just telling you want they said to me and it makes. Makes no difference to me as I have no desire to go to Harvard. "
1. Whether grading system is flawed in Harvard, it is still considered an honor to get accepted by Harvard.
All this grading business becomes even more interesting when the roles are reversed. A year ago I started teaching psychology part-time at a *very* small local college (think one building). I went to a very prestigious grad school and my first semester teaching at this small college was an eye-opener. There is a huge disparity in the knowledge level of college students from school to school. I felt as if I was teaching high school students and spending time going over very basic concepts. It was still rewarding, but quite frustrating. Anyway, about grades. I tried not to be a hard-ass, but I have a minimal standard that I hold every college student to, and if you do not meet that standard you are not passing. I definitely rewarded the 'star' students with good grades, and curved the rest of the class' grades. I found out you can't make everyone happy, but you can make most happy if you are fair in your grading. I always hated wishy-washy profs that you never knew what grade you were going to receive. When I was a student I obsessed about grades, but now that I'm a bit older and possibly wiser
I realize that there is sooo much more to a student/employee than their grades.
-Steve
I found out you can't make everyone happy, but you can make most happy if you are fair in your grading. I always hated wishy-washy profs that you never knew what grade you were going to receive.
This seems to happen more often than not. Example...In one of the Derivatives (Futures and Options trading) classes I recently took the grade consisted of 4 grades. The first test, midterm, final exam and final paper. Going into the final exam (last day of class) everyone only knew two of the four grades. Basically, I only know how I did in 50% of the course b/c I never got back the other 50% to check over and learn from my mistakes. Where's the learning process in this? To this day I still have no idea how I did on the last 50% of the grade but ended up doing really well in the class. The point is that there is way too much ambiguity and not enough accountability on the University level especially.
Originally Posted by crazyfrenchman27 Yep, it's called Harvey Mudd.
Innumerate suicides ... and counting.
-Matt
I thought Chicago was the king of suicides...sad stories have come out of there.
"Chicago, the place where fun comes to die"
"Chicago, the level of hell dante forgot"
to add to my earlier comments on Berkeley: for some reason most students seem to think that getting an A is impossible and therefore don't try after their first semester here... but it's not. there is also a large gap between the engineers and chemistry when compared to social sciences like ethnic studies/poli sci; the latter seem to be filled with "A" grades while the former are working all hours of the day hoping that they might not fail...but the administration can't reform the system to allow some breathing room for some students and less easy grades for others due to every department being militantly independent and suspicious of the university.
to add to the fire:many people here like to make jokes at the rich private schools as being afflicted by grade inflation.
But with a 50,000+ student body and the variety of classes, the percentage of people that get A's can vary anywhere from 8% (hard@$$ professors) to 80% (generally guest lecture type classes) for a given class. General average is around 25% A's 25% B's 30% C's though.
My college was a percent system. No letter grades, just a percentage.. even the GPA was a percent out of 100%. Most of my teachers marked on a curve.. we had a test that was about 40 questions, I finished 8 and got 100%!
I love that, because it lets you show when you're REALLY outstanding. I hated it in highschool when you were the smartest, but the tests were easy and like 20 other people got 100%'s along with you.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
