Student takes university to court over grade.

[paintmered]

I think once you get out of high school, grades are pretty meaningless.

You either earn the degree you're attempting to get, or you don't. What's the point of stratifying things out beyond that (aside from some compulsion to know how you compare to other people doing the same thing)?

But, then again, I also think that once you start paying for schooling you should have the choice as to whether or not a grade appears on your transcript. The way things are currently set up it's like McDonalds force-feeding you the hamburger you just bought even if you're not hungry.

There's a big difference between passing a class with an A and passing a class with a D-.

At least in my field of study, potential employers look at individual course grades. It gives an interviewer the opportunity to ask, "So how do you explain this C- in diff eq?".

[OSUmed2010]

I think once you get out of high school, grades are pretty meaningless.

You either earn the degree you're attempting to get, or you don't. What's the point of stratifying things out beyond that (aside from some compulsion to know how you compare to other people doing the same thing)?

But, then again, I also think that once you start paying for schooling you should have the choice as to whether or not a grade appears on your transcript. The way things are currently set up it's like McDonalds force-feeding you the hamburger you just bought even if you're not hungry.

Also, if you're planning on going to graduate school, you're future very much depends on the grades you are getting.

[wolfboy]

As a former teacher and a student I've never been a fan of the curve myself, and I've often been on the "smilin' side" of the curve. I feel that grades should be an objective measurement of a student's performance that the student can use to measure his or her own progress rather basing the grade off of how one compares to other students. If everyone in the class works hard and does well, the grades should reflect that. Likewise if people blow off a class and have lower scores, the grades should reflect that as well.

That's a very nice post. I couldn't agree more.

[cincinnati chili]

Also, if you're planning on going to graduate school, you're future very much depends on the grades you are getting.

Very true. I didn't care much about grades in college. But that affected my choice in law schools several years later. And the law school I'm attending will/has likely affect(ed) my job offers.

As for grading curves, I have no problem with them if they're enforced consistently by all professors.

My law school has a B- curve (half the people in every class must be given a B- or worse). However, there are a few old-timer-fully-tenured professors who ignore it, and muck up the class rankings. That's not fair, considering how much attention legal employers pay to class rank.

[Caveat Emperor]

There's a big difference between passing a class with an A and passing a class with a D-.

At least in my field of study, potential employers look at individual course grades. It gives an interviewer the opportunity to ask, "So how do you explain this C- in diff eq?".

My argument would be that a passing grade is a passing grade -- it signifies (or should) that you achieved satisfactory mastery of the material sufficient for the University to confer a degree upon you. If the difference between a D- student and an A student is so great as to raise eyebrows, that indicates to me that the D- student probably shouldn't be passing.

As for grades as related to employment -- everything I've heard/read/seen indicates that, in most fields, they stop being important after a work history is developed. If grades were truly relevant predictors of success or failure in an industry, they'd continue to be large factors in jobs 5-10+ years out of school. From what I understand (and what I know of my own personal field) that is rarely the case.

Again, all just my own opinion.

Also, if you're planning on going to graduate school, you're future very much depends on the grades you are getting.

All the more reason I should retain some control over whether or not graduate school see my grades. If I paid $1,000 for a 3 credit course, didn't like the professor or the material and barely scraped a C in it, why should I be forced to report it on my transcript? I paid for the course, I didn't like what I got for my money, why should I be forced to suffer the outcome?

[wolfboy]

Very true. I didn't care much about grades in college. But that affected my choice in law schools several years later. And the law school I'm attending will/has likely affect(ed) my job offers.

As for grading curves, I have no problem with them if they're enforced consistently by all professors.

My law school has a B- curve (half the people in every class must be given a B- or worse). However, there are a few old-timer-fully-tenured professors who ignore it, and muck up the class rankings. That's not fair, considering how much attention legal employers pay to class rank.

My law school runs on a similar system, but it's based lower than a B-. We lose a fair amount from 1L to 2L. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I've done well, and I've felt resented for it at times. I don't care for the (often ugly) competition between students.
In undergrad, my g.p.a. was very good. Unfortunately, my LSAT wasn't as sparkling, and that limited my options (that's my assumption anyway). I'm not so great in the standardized test department. It always pisses me off to think that one test may have had such implications on my options for the future.

[Caveat Emperor]

My law school runs on a similar system, but it's based lower than a B-. We lose a fair amount from 1L to 2L. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I've done well, and I've felt resented for it at times. I don't care for the (often ugly) competition between students.

Toledo Law ran on a C curve for all 1L and required 2L (Evidence, Con Law II, and Ethics) courses. I never really had a problem with the curve except for my Property I course, where the professor gave an exam that was far too easy. The difference in raw score between an "A" and a "C+" ended up being the equivalent of something like 3 multiple choice questions simply because the scores were so closely bunched together.

The main issue I had with the law school curve (when it didn't benefit me, naturally) is that I wasn't being graded on how much I knew but, rather, how much I knew relative to everyone else. I could do well on a test, but not get an "A" because there were a couple people who knew more than I did. They might deserve "A" grades, but the fact that they studied just as hard as I did should have no bearing on my mark.

But it was a fact of life in law school...no sense getting mad at it.

It always pisses me off to think that one test may have had such implications on my options for the future.

The entire American education system seems to be shifting towards a focus on so-called "high stakes testing" at all levels. Right now, the testing prior to college is all for purposes of allocating funding dollars at the state level. Most schools now teach curriculums that are entirely focused on preparing students to take and pass whatever state-mandated standardized test is required for their level.

Eventually, I wouldn't be surprised to start seeing more testing at earlier ages to identify and seperate the college-track students from the rest of the kids. It is how education is handled just about everywhere else in the first world.

[LoganBuck]

I would be mad if I were him.

I once recieved the benefit of the curve. I took an advanced Econ class at OSU, the professor was Chinese he spoke in broken english and he did not use a text book for reference. I struggled all quarter, my roomates were also taking the class and we studied hard. All quarter we scraped by, but the final was an absolute disaster. The prof put stuff on the test that he didn't cover, and what was on there he had marginalized. I saw another student who I had class with over the years look over the test, stand up, walk to the front of the classroom, and pronounce, "Thanks for nothing, you worthless piece of trash of an educator!" He stormed off to the deans office. I finished the test and went to my favorite watering hole. I spent the next few days fretting grades being posted. I got my test results first 19%!, near I could tell my overall performace had earned me a 42% and undoubtably an F. The Final Grades came in the I got a C. I later learned that the student that stormed off, had gotten in the dean's ear and the university interveined on behalf of all the students.

Another class I took had the professor who was Harvard educated, (he wouldn't let you forget it either) the class was Honors Greek Civilization. He took off for three weeks during the quarter to go to Greece on an archeological dig. He came back and was rather terse, he made the class watch a video tape, and look at a slide show, and then he had an exam. There were 15 honors students in the class. He decided to grade on the bell curve I had earned a high B, and recieved a B, which I was fine with. I found out however that several other students who had been very upset with him about his leaving while we were paying for him to instruct us, received Ds, supposedly no one failed. They took the issue to the dean and their grades were corrected.

The system can have holes, and it does have flexibility.

[SandyD]

Eventually, I wouldn't be surprised to start seeing more testing at earlier ages to identify and seperate the college-track students from the rest of the kids. It is how education is handled just about everywhere else in the first world.

I'd like to see a middle school level testing/guidance system implemented. Something like this:

6th grade:

two standardized tests given: aptitude and skill
A guidance counselor would sit with the student and parent to discuss the results. Guidance. Want to go to college? You need to improve here and here. Don't want to go to college? We have the following vocational tracks available later on. Look over them, and see if any appeal to you. Don't know? Think you might? Work hard in these areas. Etc.

Instruction for the child would not change at this point, except maybe some borderline students could get some extra help in problem areas if they want.

7th grade:

Same type testing given.
Same type meeting.


8th grade:
Same thing, only now decisions have to be made such has what track the child takes in High School.

I'd also work with local business to provide vocational/business training/opportunities to those non-college-bound students. Including entrepreneurship training and help understanding business financing.

Now, I'd still give academic training to vocational HS level students. Just with a different focus. Some people don't want to/aren't ready for college right after HS, and decide to go later.

[15fan]

I find it fascinating that the student who is so worked up is a 50 year old undergrad.

[Danny Serafini]

I think once you get out of high school, grades are pretty meaningless.

You either earn the degree you're attempting to get, or you don't.

Agree with this totally. I work for a recruiting company, and have worked with employers in a number of different industries. A high majority of these job orders require a candidate with a college degree. I'd say in the time I've been here less than 1% have required that the person carry a certain GPA in college. It's only happened a couple of times. All that matters is that you have the degree, not how you got it.