Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The median grade at Harvard College is an A-, and the most frequently awarded mark is an A, Dean of Undergraduate Education Jay M. Harris said on Tuesday afternoon, supporting suspicions that the College employs a softer grading standard than many of its peer institutions.
There is a fight against this among MBA programs today (not the exact topic, I know, but relevant). The top 15 or so MBA programs refuse to let students put their GPA on their resume any more. Recruiters require GMAT scores instead, since it is the same across all schools. When I as applying for post-MBA jobs, recruiters would only look at GMAT scores, case study competitions and interviews to give out jobs.
There is a fight against this among MBA programs today (not the exact topic, I know, but relevant). The top 15 or so MBA programs refuse to let students put their GPA on their resume any more. Recruiters require GMAT scores instead, since it is the same across all schools. When I as applying for post-MBA jobs, recruiters would only look at GMAT scores, case study competitions and interviews to give out jobs.
Which makes sense---not unlike UGcolleges weighting ACT/SAT more than a GPA
There was a Duke professor who did an in depth study of this a few years ago. The consensus: Schools HAVE to inflate grades so that their students can be competitive.
They want their grads to get the best jobs, the best paying jobs so that they can become contributing Alumn. This may have less of an impact on ivys, but I suspect it still plays a role. It may be hard for a hiring manager to compare the curriculum between two different grads from different schools, but they sure can understand a 4.0 scale.
Being smart should not guarantee an A. You need to put efforts, which requires some aptitude too.
Yes they are in Harvard, which the transcript always shows. There is no need to inflate the grades to show that again.
I went to Poly and of the thousands of engineers who graduated the year I did, only a few had GPA's over 3.7. perhaps 10-20 of 1-2,000 kids.
The one kid I knew who had a super high GPA didn't put much effort into it. He was also smarter than some of the teachers teaching the classes. He was a complete freak. I tried like hell and got a 3.3 overall and a 3.8 in my major. I think he got like a 3.9 or something which was unheard of for the school.
I then asked what my friend got at his school. He received a 3.9X in his major from eastern Michigan in exercise science or something like that? He would measure and train athletes to increase performance. I asked him how does he measure the performance difference (I was getting at the null and alternative hypothesis testing with a 90-95+% confidence). He didn't even know what I was talking about.
Remember the economic crisis was engineered by people who graduated from elite schools. What does that tell you?
I had a convo with someone about this.
Basically math and science, everyone is on the same page. it's straight forward and accepted that the theory is correct.
religion/politics/economics/etc is more or less an unproven field. There is not a right or wrong, but more of a consensus, and one that I think favors the abuse of the system for a few select groups of individuals to game and do some "human farming" or slavery from our monetary system. Hence the economic system we have is one that is confusing and they seem to "get it wrong."
how is a 100 scale a better deterrent to grade inflation than a 4.0 scale?
With a 100 scale, your final grades will be 69, 78, 85, etc, not just A, B, C. As a result, the variance will be bigger.
Even if everyone gets an 'A', you can still tell some are 95, others are 90.
Also, professors will not round your 88 to 90, or 79 to 80. It is just the way it is, because there is no concept of A, B, C.
Last edited by Bettafish; 12-26-2013 at 01:12 PM..
With a 100 scale, your final grades will be 69, 78, 85, etc, not just A, B, C. As a result, the variance will be bigger.
Even if everyone gets an 'A', you can still tell some are 95, others are 90.
Also, professors will not round your 88 to 90, or 79 to 80. It is just the way it is, because there is no concept of A, B, C.
you have proven that a 100 scale is a finer scale (i.e. can carry more information) than a 4.0 scale, but you have not proven that it is a better deterrent to grade inflation -- if everybody can get an 'A' then everybody can get a 95. in other words, the scale does not cause grade inflation -- common practice does.
What does it matter? Isn't Harvard one of only 15 or so universities that are worth attending?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
