Support NeoGAF

[maharg]

except that, a lot of CS professors think any test where even a single student is capable of getting >90% was a boring test that didn't correctly assess the students. Most professors 'aim' for all of their tests to have 50-60% averages but because they make completely new tests each year its extremely hard to predict how difficult any given test is actually going to be.

Maybe any professor, CS or not (I don't know why you keep making that distinction. What makes you think CS is so special here? Everything you've said applies to any program), who thinks that should go back and retake statistics. The goal of a test is not to be exciting or difficult, it's to test level of knowledge. If they're trying to keep the average at 50-60%, either they're not teaching everything they should or the tests are too hard. The average should be around 70-75% with a normal distribution around that, with maybe one or two people getting in the 90s and one or two people failing. There's a reason that's called a normal distribution. Because it's normal and indicates that the professor was teaching effectively.

As for punishing the students for the professors screwing up... What the hell do you think is happening anyways? The student will move on to the next course with less knowledge than they should have had. That's punishment if you ask me. And I don't see how it's more idealistic to actually want to be able to identify and deal with teachers who don't teach effectively than to try and cover up their problems. The most idealistic position here, if you ask me, is the one that assumes that it's right for students to have an a class average below 50% and be able to successfuly continue their studies.

 

[slayn]

I keep saying CS because all my non-CS classes (even high level math courses) have been extremely different grading wise than my CS classes. Its been far more harsh and competive in my CS classes.

and the point of curving is because how can you tell the difference between a classrom full of students not as smart as previous semesters' and a final thats harder than previous semesters'? You can't. And so you have to guess and either fuck over equally smart students or let not as smart students get a little bump in their grade. Generally the preferred option is to avoid fucking over innocents.

And the reason for 50% and below averages is for 1 of 2 reasons (depending on professor or class material)

1. My AI prof even gave a speach about this. He said the goal of his tests was to see a large spread of grades because that gives him the most information about his current students. If, say, two people get 100%, you didn't get to find out who was the smarter of the two. If two students get a 0%, you didn't get to find out who was the dumber of the two. So they try and plop the average right in the middle to get the widest spread of grades and see who stands out on both ends. If the average is 80 and someone gets 100, maybe that person just studied a little more and was a little smarter. You don't really know just *how* smart he is. But if the average is 50% and he gets 100%, you know he is a fucking genius. (or he cheated)

2. This applies to that CS373 class I mentioned. The grades are low in that class because the material (or lack there of) makes the class that fucking hard. There is no 'material' in that class. The first thing out of the prof's mouth on the first day is, "you will learn nothing in this class. It exists merely to build your intuition for problem solving." The class is a weeder class that exists to test your ability to be presented with problems unlike any you have ever seen in your entire life, sit for 5 minutes thinking shit up, and then attempt to write a somewhat coherent answer.

 

[miyuru]

I love Canada...

 

[Phoenix]

I'm sorry, this is just some idealistic bullshit where all professors are saints that teach flawlessly, create perfectly fair exams and assignments and don't screw students over one way or another. If a professor fucks up somehow, teaches stuff wrong or creates a completely unfair exam that doesn't test what students were learning, why should the students be punished? Fact is, most people are going to come across a course that is just truly unfair in its assessment of all students' abilities. When shit happens and it's recognized, there isn't much option in going back in time and doing it all correctly or redoing anything. The only remotely fair thing to do for the students is a curve.

Sure, there's the issue of someone having to determine when the professor was fair or not, but really, the concept that curves never, ever have a place in a learning environment is just dumb. This assumption that it can only be the student's fault for either not learning properly or not being assessed well is simply unrealistic.

I see. So if the classes highest grade is a 55 on an exam, you're saying it makes sense to give the student that scored a 55 an A. In what universe does that even remotely make sense? If the students are failing then there needs to be another prof. If you're in a class where the highest score is a 55 do YOU say 'ya know the prof isn't teaching us shit I'm going to withdraw and actually learn something' or do you rejoice because you got a 53 and will be getting an A as well.

 

[Phoenix]

OR: You're being rewarded for recognizing your shortcomings. If you really don't know what you're talking about, please don't even bother trying.

Yeah, so if I see a question that I don't know how to answer its better for me to not even try. Makes sense. I can actually see that attitude transferring to the business world.

If I don't know what I'm doing, I won't try. I'll wait for someone to do it.

 

[maharg]

I keep saying CS because all my non-CS classes (even high level math courses) have been extremely different grading wise than my CS classes. Its been far more harsh and competive in my CS classes.

Were you in the CS major when you were taking those classes? Non-core classes that are dominated by people from one program or major tend to go easy because they know the people in them don't like it. If you were majoring in mathematics or philosophy or whatever, the grading would probably be harsher.

 

[Dan]

I see. So if the classes highest grade is a 55 on an exam, you're saying it makes sense to give the student that scored a 55 an A. In what universe does that even remotely make sense? If the students are failing then there needs to be another prof. If you're in a class where the highest score is a 55 do YOU say 'ya know the prof isn't teaching us shit I'm going to withdraw and actually learn something' or do you rejoice because you got a 53 and will be getting an A as well.

I'm not saying a different prof isn't necessary, but you know what, logistically and practically speaking, suddenly getting a new prof in there or dropping and taking the course another time isn't such an easy or possible solution. It's not simple for everyone to just waste time and money on a course to have to do it again, and quite simply, you're not going to know whether the course will be properly executed before your time and money is committed. I don't see how punishing the student with a low grade and no learned knowledge is helpful to anyone.

As for punishing the students for the professors screwing up... What the hell do you think is happening anyways? The student will move on to the next course with less knowledge than they should have had. That's punishment if you ask me. And I don't see how it's more idealistic to actually want to be able to identify and deal with teachers who don't teach effectively than to try and cover up their problems. The most idealistic position here, if you ask me, is the one that assumes that it's right for students to have an a class average below 50% and be able to successfuly continue their studies.

Please point out where in my post that I say by using a curve the problem of the professor is somehow solved. I said no such bullshit about covering up for the professor or ignoring that issue. BUT something still has to be done for those students in the immediate time period, and I don't see how failing them helps ANYONE. Most competent university programs that I'm aware of take internal account of grades for placement into programs and for advanced courses. If the person wasn't given the chance to learn the material and then fails for it, you're only punishing him twice.

 

[Azih]

Man, some of the grading systems mentioned in here are crazy. 75-100 = "A"? 80-100 = "A"? Not only is that ridiculous, but it's totally unfair to those students who are capable of maintaining 95+ averages, since they'll be getting the same grade as one who had an 84 average. Also, in terms of the ranges, 80 for an "A" seems absurdly low, though perhaps the material or pace of the course is more difficult in these countries than it is here, though I can't see it being an order of magnitude higher-- especially considering that these systems hold across entire nations (e.g., Australia, as mentioned above) and not just for elite institutions, where I could see such a thing holding true.

Eh you don't have the full picture. In high school (once again Ontario), you also have A+s for if you do much better than 80 % PLUS they keep track of your percentages. So while both 81% and 98% percentage students are 'A students'. Everybody knows that the kid that got 98% is spectacular in academics and markedly superior to the decent 81% student.

University of Toronto uses a 4 point GPA system. 3.2 and above graduate with distinction, 3.8 and above graduate with high distinction.

 

[slayn]

Were you in the CS major when you were taking those classes? Non-core classes that are dominated by people from one program or major tend to go easy because they know the people in them don't like it. If you were majoring in mathematics or philosophy or whatever, the grading would probably be harsher.

CS major with a minor in math. I make the distinction because I'm arguing from my own experience, and be they different or not, they were different in my experience and those of my non CS friends. I mean even interviews are different for CS majors (I don't know why). When was the last time a non CS person went to a job fair and every single company they talked to had some sort of algorithm or proof or mathematical problem for you to solve on the on the spot on the back of your resume? =\

I don't claim to know why its different majoring in CS. Nor if the differences are good/bad overall. I just know what I've seen/heard/experienced.

 

[Azih]

In my experience CS undergrads get rocked like crazy as well. Other disciplines put the screws to you in post graduate studies or in certifications (like getting a Bachelors in Business is easy, but if you want to get your CA certification then you will be put through the wringer)

 

[maharg]

Please point out where in my post that I say by using a curve the problem of the professor is somehow solved.

Please point out where in my post I say that you said that by using a curve the problem of the professor is somehow solved. In fact, my issue with it is that I don't believe it IS solved. If these were isolated incidents, that would indicate that the problems are being solved, but it sounds like it's much more common than it should be.

 

[Dan]

And I don't see how it's more idealistic to actually want to be able to identify and deal with teachers who don't teach effectively than to try and cover up their problems.

There you are saying I'm insinuating a curve was the only thing I was proposing, when in fact I also said the core issues had to be dealt with for future students. Glad to be of service.

 

[maharg]

That's still not what you said I said you said.

Retarded "don't put words in my mouth" arguments aside, it doesn't sound like they effectively use it to solve problems or the curve not matching the actual scores would be rare.

In fact, I would argue the only reason to institute grading by curve as a policy would be because the problem isn't rare. If it's rare, things can be done when it does happen to make sure the students can move on if possible. It's not like grading on a curve is any more of a 'fix' than adjusting the grades after actually investigating the reasons for the mismatch.

If the test was simply out of the reasonable realm of possibility for the students to actually succeed on, I'm not against adjusting the grades to match the curve in that particular instance. I am against giving what amounts to permission to fuck students over with evil tests by promising them a grade on a bell curve they didn't really achieve.

 

[Suranga3]

University Of Alberta (Edmonton, Alberta)

Undergraduate Grade Descriptors

Excellent: A+, A, A-

Good: B+, B, B-

Satisfactory: C+, C, C-

Poor: D+

Minimal Pass: D

Failure: F



Graduate Grade Descriptors

Excellent: A+, A, A-

Good: B+, B

Satisfactory: B-, C+

Failure: C, C-, D+, D, F

 

[maharg]

Oh no, another Edmontonian. This is getting crazy.

They mark on a curve at the UofA don't they?

 

[LusDekkar]

Well school system in Australia is like
At university

50-59 – Pass
60 – 70 – Credit
70 – 80 - Distinction
80+ High – Distinction

At my uni we use that system for most undergrad units but for some units we use H1, H2A, H2B, and H3.
I can't remember the exact numbers but i think it's H1 = 85+%, H2A = 80-85%, H2B 70-80%, H3 < 70%. In those units you're expected to get H2B or higher. So basically if you get a H3 you might as well considered that you failed the unit, even though you didn't technically fail.

 

[McLesterolBeast]

The class averages and arbitrary letter-to-percentage equivalencies for a given program mean little so long as those who will potentially be evaluating your transcript recognize the difficulty of a program.

 

[tenchir]

in where I grew up, 90-100 was an A, but apparently in the northeast (specifically PA and NJ), an A is a 93-100, while a B is 83-92. WTF is up with that. That's probably the stupidest thing ever.

Hmmm, are those grades for medical course? Medical courses such as anatomy tend to grade you a lot harder because they want the most competent people in the medical field.... would you trust a doctor who averages C+ in school?