Only national examinations in specific subjects could establish the validity of institutions' grading, and there many objections to such tests. So admission to grad and prof schools or post-bac hirings remain the best indicators.
As someone posted earlier, you can get an excellent education at your community college. I sure did with Irvine Community College. CSUF, not so much. There, students are just part of a giant herd, faces without names. That applied to my major too. It's tough to be special when you are 1 0f 90 in several classes each semester, then 1 0f 50 in your major, and that was with being a tad older and more mature than my classmates. My CSUF professors seemed less engaged. Not all of them, but most of them. I earned plenty of A's and B's. I guess my testimonial supports something about tougher grading in a apples vs. oranges way. I agree it's flawed study.
MIT vs. CSUF, hands down Fullerton is harder. I don't think anyone at MIT could make the cut to get on Fullerton's baseball team. Well . . . I doubt anyone could. Only a small pool of CSUF students could hang in there at MIT in one of its math/science competitions. I guess it's a draw.
We should all be glad we could even go to any university and finish. Be proud of yourselves and don't belittle anyone for their education. We've all made an effort to become better people on some level. So congratulations to all of us.
My thoughts on grade inflation: I had a student who wanted to take my class. But she wants to do med school. So she dropped my class. Why? She wasn't sure she would get an A, which basically would kill her chances of getting into med school. So well, let's think how that affects grade inflation.
Get med and law schools to start insisting that an A- or a B in an honors course is worth more than an A in a regular course, and then you'll start having better educated people going into med and law schools.
Sounds like med schools, which aren't free at last check either, need to look at their admissions process. Not to dilute the quality of our doctors, but the MD shortage may be eased without these preliminary/artificial hurdles at least to get admission. How well a doc did in his undergrad Greek Culture, Conversational Norwegian or PE has zero to do with his ability to be a great doc! Perhaps a more subjective view of candidates would be a help too.
Sorry, but SFU is not is Eastern Canada, it is on the West Coast. And UBC would be considered much tougher than SFU, as well as Queens, U of T, and McGill for Eastern Canada.
They may be tough schools, but where are the 5 Federal Service Academies? The US Military Academy, US Naval Academy, US Air Force Academy, US Coast Guard Academy, and US Merchant Marine Academy don't suffer from grade inflation and are as academically challenging as any of the schools on the list. Not only do these young men and women take the hardest classes, they have to remain physically fit and also handle their regimental activities.
How about a crackdown on colleges, especially the for-profit ones but they should ALL be looked at, and students refunded?
This supply-side looting of students who go to schools in good faith, want to learn, want criticism, and to earn their grades are often getting shafted, ignored by instructors (especially those who can't put their class assignments and syllabuses together properly), and a slew of other factors, right down to job sector pay being far lower and keeping students indebted.
Why does our society hamper those who want to be ethical and work in good faith but allow colleges to fleece, amongst other tangential issues? And, yeah, there are underpaid good instructors, admins who will whittle down quality to pocket any cost difference as "profit", and a wider array of issues...
Obama was right when he said we need more educated people here, but since colleges won't regulate themselves, we need real action. People caught in the middle should not have to be so ill-treated.
Any professor, who attempts to adhere to high standards of performance, should expect a fair range of responses from students. Some administrations, however, will overly cater to the whiners and negative student evaluations can lead to early retirement. Not sensitive to the needs of students, need to do more handholding, were among the criticisms I received. Yes, negative evaluations can be a career-killer at certain institutions. "Directly stated, no Area Director, whether the geographic area was Korea or Japan or Germany or Okinawa, would like to think of a faculty member with such student evaluations settling into her/his geographic area of responsibility," I was warned.
As a second year chemical engineering student at Purdue, I can definitely vouch for the difficulty of the grading scale here. I've been completely miserable during my time here, receiving multiple grades on test below 50%, which put me in the average and thus earn me around a C. I don't think it's healthy for students to have to go through this; the feeling of failure all the time is not good for anyone's well being. I'd like to see them change the courses here to make the tests easier with stricter grading guidelines. Even though I still may earn the same letter grade, it would make me feel much better mentally and emotionally to know that they didn't have to curve the scale just so I could pass, and also the fact that I would truly earn the grade I am given (ie they don't assign me a grade based off an enormous curve).
I think you need to harden up lad. When you get into the real world, the real advanatge you have will be recognized. Working to improve your grade lets you think in expansively.
We need thinkers and doers in the world, rather than those who swan through things with little effort. In the long run C students who have worked hard tend to much better than the A students.
You've picked a very challenging curriculum at a stellar university. Hopefully, the rewards will come with hard work. It may be disheartening that the grading scale is not like you had in HS. Many college students don't like how professors grade on the curve. But that is a good way for the prof to assess the overall compentency of the class. Stick with it.
Speaking as someone who went to Harvey Mudd (I remember being really proud of my 77% on a freshman chemistry exam - 2nd highest in the class), and who is now a professor at a large institution:
I really wish I could write exams that give me an idea of the full distribution of the students. My last exam had 1 score of 120/120, 2 of 119/120, 2 of 118/120, and almost everyone else came in above 105/120. Most of the points lost were for accidental errors. I cannot fairly distinguish between my top students. How do I write a letter of recommendation if I can't tell the difference between the top 20% of my students?
I should have exams which show what my top students know and don't know. If the average student gets a low percentage out of that, who cares? I make sure there are enough lower level questions on the exam that I can tell who should fail, who should get a B, etc. Who cares what the actual final percentage is?
Unfortunately, I can't make my exams that hard. Because there is some crazy notion that a 90% should be a threshold between A and B. It shouldn't - your grade should represent how well you understand the material and how much I would trust you to apply that material in the real world. If I could ask harder questions, then my top students would go into the exam knowing that putting in more effort will reward them.
Your professors probably write the test anticipating a 50% average. They don't consider a 90% to be the threshold between A and B or below 70% to be failing. They will look at the material you've learned and determine what the appropriate grade is.
Something to think about: I recently ran into another graduate from Mudd. She mentioned that while at Mudd she hadn't been happy, but since graduating she had come to really appreciate what she learned and regretted not taking full advantage of it - because she could have taken care of her first three years of grad school if she had taken the opportunity.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
I was proud of the B+ I got in his medieval literature course (on my way to becoming an English teacher).
MIT vs. CSUF, hands down Fullerton is harder. I don't think anyone at MIT could make the cut to get on Fullerton's baseball team. Well . . . I doubt anyone could. Only a small pool of CSUF students could hang in there at MIT in one of its math/science competitions. I guess it's a draw.
We should all be glad we could even go to any university and finish. Be proud of yourselves and don't belittle anyone for their education. We've all made an effort to become better people on some level. So congratulations
to all of us.
Get med and law schools to start insisting that an A- or a B in an honors course is worth more than an A in a regular course, and then you'll start having better educated people going into med and law schools.
This supply-side looting of students who go to schools in good faith, want to learn, want criticism, and to earn their grades are often getting shafted, ignored by instructors (especially those who can't put their class assignments and syllabuses together properly), and a slew of other factors, right down to job sector pay being far lower and keeping students indebted.
Why does our society hamper those who want to be ethical and work in good faith but allow colleges to fleece, amongst other tangential issues? And, yeah, there are underpaid good instructors, admins who will whittle down quality to pocket any cost difference as "profit", and a wider array of issues...
Obama was right when he said we need more educated people here, but since colleges won't regulate themselves, we need real action. People caught in the middle should not have to be so ill-treated.
We need thinkers and doers in the world, rather than those who swan through things with little effort. In the long run C students who have worked hard tend to much better than the A students.
I really wish I could write exams that give me an idea of the full distribution of the students. My last exam had 1 score of 120/120, 2 of 119/120, 2 of 118/120, and almost everyone else came in above 105/120. Most of the points lost were for accidental errors. I cannot fairly distinguish between my top students. How do I write a letter of recommendation if I can't tell the difference between the top 20% of my students?
I should have exams which show what my top students know and don't know. If the average student gets a low percentage out of that, who cares? I make sure there are enough lower level questions on the exam that I can tell who should fail, who should get a B, etc. Who cares what the actual final percentage is?
Unfortunately, I can't make my exams that hard. Because there is some crazy notion that a 90% should be a threshold between A and B. It shouldn't - your grade should represent how well you understand the material and how much I would trust you to apply that material in the real world. If I could ask harder questions, then my top students would go into the exam knowing that putting in more effort will reward them.
Your professors probably write the test anticipating a 50% average. They don't consider a 90% to be the threshold between A and B or below 70% to be failing. They will look at the material you've learned and determine what the appropriate grade is.
Something to think about: I recently ran into another graduate from Mudd. She mentioned that while at Mudd she hadn't been happy, but since graduating she had come to really appreciate what she learned and regretted not taking full advantage of it - because she could have taken care of her first three years of grad school if she had taken the opportunity.