Comments on: Dean Jackson’s Grade Memo – UPDATE

By: Mad about LRW

Mad about LRW — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:10:06 +0000

What is the deal with LRW? For 200 years this is not treated the same as other classes and now, with absolutely no discussion, it is. Why?

LRW is graded completely differently than any other mandatory class, is not taught by full professors, and is not anonymously graded. It should be graded credit/no credit. What is the explanation for this?

By: N

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:52:13 +0000

Firms never knew the curve with the exactness that they do now. It’s a very surprising about face from the administration to release the curve and to make it so student-unfriendly.

By: M

Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:50:40 +0000

In case anyone didn’t know, firms figure out the curve. They have lots of applicants so they can figure it out. Also, one partner (after some drinks at a reception) admitted that his firm and some others actually share grade data to get a better picture of the curve.

Since they will know the curve, I’m glad I also know it.

By: L

Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:12:49 +0000

I think it’s obvious that we don’t like the new system. It doesn’t do what it was intended to do, and in fact exacerbates problems it was supposed to solve. So what is anyone doing about this? Are we just going to complain to a bulletin board? Please, Student Government, update us – are you going to do anything? Talk to anyone?

By: Confused

Confused — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:52:35 +0000

Why did he post percentages? What possible good could that do? We haven’t had a public curve for 200 years and seemingly worked out all right. it seems like this whole charade was intended to signal more, not less, to potential employers (and, of course, to trick perspectives into thinking it is a no grades utopia).

I feel like the victim of a bait and switch, but, of course, the administration is going to ignore any of these concerns, so perhaps we should just trudge on and not question them.

By: anon

anon — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 05:40:59 +0000

As I read through these comments, I become more convinced that this policy is going to do more bad than good. 1Ls will be absolutely paranoid that they will be one of the 8% that gets a LP. LP is going to look devastating on a transcript, far worse than a B- does now.

Students with a little more confidence will feel stressed out to snag one of the 37% H’s. 37% is small enough to be difficult to achieve, but large enough to make students feel like they should be getting it. This is in contrast to the current system, where (my understanding is that) only about 20-25% get A/A- grades. This makes it more exclusive and students don’t feel bad about missing it.

And is it true that Dean Kagan said there would be no latin honors at the town hall? That is unfortunate.

By: PK

PK — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:00:10 +0000

Now that we’ve seen the devil in the details, it’s clear that we’ve traded a “comfortably” flawed system for a carnival of new horrors. It’s absurd to think that throwing 8% of students under the bus in every class–when no one was forced into a C before–will reduce the pressure to perform academically, and it might be even crazier to think that giving Honors grades to such a high proportion of students will signal anything more significant than dumb statistical luck in grading.

Based on every discussion I’ve heard among students, if the student body could vote tomorrow on whether to accept the new grading system, the resolution would almost certainly fail.

What steps will our Student Government take to voice these concerns?

By: T

Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:21:16 +0000

My biggest objection to the new grading system is that it demeans summa cum laude honors. Now there will be several summa graduates every year, instead of one exceptional student every few years.

By: Anon

Anon — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:43:38 +0000

P is, for sure, less favorable than any B-range grade. Furthermore, with the publication of the percentages, any P will automatically be interpreted as below average (since that would be the best bet, as 3/4 of the students receiving Ps are now known to be in the bottom half of the class). At the same time, the relatively high percentage of students receiving Hs dilutes any distinction the mark could otherwise confer.

I greatly disapprove of the school’s decision to subject current 2Ls to both grading systems. Having heard from many sources how important transcripts are even long after graduation (whether in public interest, private firms, or academia) , students will be greatly disadvantaged. Any Ps during your 3L year will make earlier high marks seem inflated and undeserved; any Hs will be interpreted as you barely making the 37% cutoff. Mixing the grading systems lets reviewers assume the worst about your best grades (people review your transcript to make a critical evaluation about you, so why would anyone assume the best?).

There are many things I dislike about being in the class of 2010: the undeveloped LegReg and International courses for which we were the first guinea pigs, the lost opportunities of classes with Dean Kagan or other professors who have now left, the extremely long email addresses, the construction which started before we did and won’t finish until after we do…. However, the transcript matter is probably my biggest grievance because it will be the most permanent.

Professors are accustomed to giving letter grades, and under the new system, students will be ranked and classes will be curved anyway. Is it really too much to ask to have our transcripts make sense? Is one more year really too much for the school to deal with? For the rest of my career, I will have to explain why the grading system changed, and it will only bring attention to the meaninglessness of Hs and the presumed subpar quality of Ps.

By: guest

guest — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:25:02 +0000

I have to agree with 23. I feel kind of cheated. We were sold a different grading system than the one we were given.