[QUOTE=IRG SithLord]Are you in college?[/QUOTE]
yes, with a hard earned 3.8 i might add.

anyway, i still feel that it's unfair to everyone to inflate students grades. it's unfair to the people who scored high, making there grades less important, and unfair to the people who scored low, moving them on to the next level before there ready. and once the student who scored low, but got moved on anyway move on, it's painfully ovious that thay arnt ready for the next level of instructon.

i'm speaking from experence. when i took spanish 1, my grade was inflated to the point where i passed with a D, but when i took spanish 2 i could not pass that class becasue i did not have the background to do so. my school was set up in a way that i could not re-take spanish 1, and so this system kept me from getting the backgroud i needed to move forward in my studyes.

in conclusion: bad grades have a purpose in life.

1) If the people scored high, they'll still score just as high in comparison, and higher in the end result. How is that demeaning at all? It doesn't make it any less important. If the student scores low and doesn't think they can make it on the next level, they can take the class again. The school isn't forcing you to do anything. You are a human being--in the end YOU make the decisions that mean the most.

2) Sounds like a problem with your school, not the curving system.

Elana probably needs the grading curve.

Sucka can't speel.

Unless grades were a competition, I doubt the people with high grades would complain that they are treated unfairly. They still have the good mark (even better with curve).

isant it rong to give someone a 100 on a test/paper/assignment if thay did not earn it?

Not if you didn't do their job.

It's not the professor's job to teach you. It's your job to learn.

Uh...no, I'm pretty sure you pay a tuition to be taught. If it was your job to learn, YOU'D be the one making money. Nice try, Free.

It is, however, your RESPONSIBILITY to learn. But if you're not being taught, then it makes your responsibility infinitely harder.

Not if you're the one paying for the education.

Okay, it's not your job, because you could pay tuition then never show up at all. I couldn't give a rat's ***.

But it's not the professor's job to teach you, simply because there's no way he can teach you unless you allow him. Plus, you really get out of college what you put into it. College is about 80% your own effort and 20% the effort of your instructors. Professors really are just there as a justification to take all your money, and give crappy lectures back in return. You're kidding yourself if you think you can just sit in a lecture, put forth no effort, and somehow learn.

Yes, it is the professor's job to teach you. However, if you don't want to learn, that's a different story.

College may be mostly about your own effort, but I think you're way overestimating the figure. You need to stop having such a defeatist attitude or you'll never get anywhere. Seriously, if you're not getting the proper education because your profs suck, leave and go somewhere else. I know plenty of people with much different stories.

Obviously, you are going to get what you put into it, but there are some college professors who are really ****ty teachers or only are teaching because they have to. In such situations, the students suffer, especialy when you are dealing with more advanced concepts and subjects.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Uh...no, I'm pretty sure you pay a tuition to be taught. If it was your job to learn, YOU'D be the one making money. Nice try, Free.

It is, however, your RESPONSIBILITY to learn. But if you're not being taught, then it makes your responsibility infinitely harder.[/QUOTE]
Apparently you haven't visited America's elementary/middle schools lately. Atleast at my private little school, CHRISTIAN SCHOOL, the parents of my friends pay their kids either like 10$ per A they get on report cards, or free paintballs, or even a freaking paintball GUN if they do well the whole year.

People like these are the problem with America's schools, or atleast partly so. I get nothing for my grades and I score the best in my class. I get the reward of straight A's for 5 1/2 years straight, and it's starting to get hard.

Hell, we've got some parents who were giving their kids money per basket they made in basketball this year. And one of the mothers came down while we were losing a game in the regional tournament and told her song "$5 a basket" and this kid is a giant, so he scores tons of baskets.

Anyone who says curves are unfair to everyone has never went to a school where a lot of the professors like to design tests intended to have averages under 50%...

...tell me what this has to do with curves. Please.

Yeah. That also happens, and tests like that are good because they are designed to see who can go to the next level. And people shouldn;t be punished for not know what comes next.

Doesn't bother me -- you'd probably accept money if you could as well.

My federal financial aid money would be pulled if I didn't do well in school - sounds like a similar situation..free tuition & books if I have good grades.

Has nothing to do with curves, though. :p

Yeah, yeah I would. But my point is it's giving kids the wrong motive for school work.

And I can't comment on college curves, but curving before then seems stupid. Although, I scored a 94 on a test, and everyone else's scores sucked so the teacher curved all scores up 6 points. But that was a stupid thing to do, I think.

Why? It had no negative impact on you, and it gave a lot of people hovering a chance to pass.

Wrong motive, or an additional incentive? My sister gets paid for good grades, and loses money if she scores a C or D, I think...but she's taking honors classes and does not have time to work. Heck, sometimes she doesn't even get picked up from school until 4 - 4:30pm. How else is she going to get money?

OK, there I don't find it as big a deal since there are punishments if she gets C's or D's. If these kids get bad grades, there is no penalty, other than the bad grades.

Yoshi, this test was NOT the only deciding factor in our grade that quarter. It helped me, but it was also an open book test (with some answers that reguardless of what my teacher says, they weren't in the material she gave us), which changes a few things as well.

Oh, and have I mentioned the basketball curving? Our 6 foot giant on our 7th grade team has been ineligible THREE TIMES by a few points. First time, teacher let him do some extra credit after the due date to get him eligible. Second time, he talked to the math teacher and convinced him he calculated his grade wrong. Third time, teacher let him CORRECT HIS HOMEWORK.

We NEVER get to turn in extra credit late, and if we do it isn't counted. This pissed me off.

This teacher did not calculate the grade wrong. This guy doesn't make grading mistakes. The fact that he weasled his way out of this one really pisses me off.

Last one, WE NEVER GET TO CORRECT HOMEWORK. NEVER. It's open book homework. If he missed it, it's his own damn fault and he shouldn't get to correct it. Me and two of my other basketball friends were going to talk to the teacher over this one, but decided against it.

I guess I should have asked the teacher if I could have corrected my homework that week, or maybe turned in some extra credit since he was. But still...this is somewhat curving, but it shows how bad my school is on it's Christian morals and standards.

Edit: OK, well, this isn't so much a curve as much as it is crappy teachers. But meh..I felt the need to vent this after, say, 2 months of boiling over it.

Let me tell you right now--Honors classes almost alway have the same amount or less work involved. They just have harder in-class work, and promote more learning at a more advanced rate.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Let me tell you right now--Honors classes almost alway have the same amount or less work involved. They just have harder in-class work, and promote more learning at a more advanced rate.[/QUOTE]
unfortunatlly, this statement is pain false.

take history (american part 2-post civil war to current) at my college:

the regular class, has 7 regular test (in the format of maps, mutapal choice, short answer, and discussion questions), and an outside reading book, with a test on that to make 8 test per unit. students are suggsted to read the text book, however, it is not nessary to do so to make a B.

the honors secton has 4 test, all maps and discussion. thay must read the text book. additonally, thay must read the ouside reading book with test material coming out of it that is intergrated into one of the 4 mentioned test. on top of that, for each testing section thay must read 250 pages of a seprate, approved book(s), and write a 2-3 page paper summerising that book, or books.

I have no problems with curves unless it severely skews the standard scale.

For instance, my Digital Logic professor last semester had a strange curving system, in which an A- to an A was 95 and above, B+- was 78 to 95, etc.

If the curve skews the standard scale so that it reduces the A range by 50%, or increases the D range by 50%, the professor really needs to just stick to the standard scale and be done with it. Let the students worry about knowing the material.

That sounds like history I took in high school. When I took Us Histiry in college, we had a text book, and 12 other books we had to read. Two mid terms and a final in essay format, no map or multiple choice questions, quizes every two weeks in the discussion section, a 10 page research paper and a presentation in section as well.

The only class that I've ever seen have more work to its regular counterpart is AP history. And Elana--we're not talking about college courses here.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]The only class that I've ever seen have more work to its regular counterpart is AP history. And Elana--we're not talking about college courses here.[/QUOTE]
there is no major difference, except that more material is covered in a college courses, with possably more work. teachers still use curves in collage, so college classes still apply.

College prep classes make me laugh. They are no where near as hard as actual college classes.

Then your school sucks. The college prep course at my school worked just like college classes, epecially the AP ones.

My mom used to pay me according to my report card. Not all that much, but I think it was $4 per a, $3 per B, and an extra dollar if it's an AP class once I got into high school. "Right now, school is your job, and you should treat it as such" or some such.

Actually I like grading curves. I've had teachers who would talke the student with the highest score and make it 100% and everything else would be proportional to that, which is completely fair to me. If no student did particularly well that says something about how the teacher taught the class. I don't understand you guys who are saying it's not fair to the students who did not do as well - the point of curves is that the test was harder than what they had been taught. So the student with the high score proves that it was possible to learn at least this much material, and the rest can be proportional to that. Makes plenty of sense to me.

GCSE, A-Level, University... and I'd never heard of grading curves until I read this thread, heh.

If the highest-scoring student gets 100% by definition, what has he to aim for? Complacency is compulsory.

I certainly know from University-level physics that on some topics I'm thoroughly pleased to get 60% and others I expect to get 100%; some topics are just plain harder than others and grades represent that. Getting 60% on a worksheet on quantum thermodynamics is more impressive than 100% on differential equations.

Of course there need to be tests to see how well teachers are teaching, but these tests must be independent of the student examinations. 'Grading curves' just seem to be a hashed up attempt to mix the two.

You forget, Americans are VERY competetive. The highest scoring person would probably either be:
1) Someone who spends way too much time studying just so they can be the best
or
2) Someone who knows the material so well they don't have to try--therefore they're not really "shooting" for anything except the best they can do while slacking off.


As someone who's been in College courses compared to High School courses I can tell you that for the most part you are DEAD wrong. Either your High School was tough, or your college is easy, or something, because college courses here require ridiculous amounts of independent working/studying.

I have a teacher who doesnt give a grading distribution. At the end of the semester he just assigns as he feels. General rule of thumb for his classes are, stay at least 3 points of the average, and you got a solid B

But curves dont hurt those who excel anyways, so why even bother. You get yours, let someone else get theirs.

How would these tests (for the teacher) be conducted?

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]
As someone who's been in College courses compared to High School courses I can tell you that for the most part you are DEAD wrong. Either your High School was tough, or your college is easy, or something, because college courses here require ridiculous amounts of independent working/studying.[/QUOTE]
I love how you say that like it makes you an authority. I'm pretty sure that most people in college have at some point been in high school.

my college doesnt curve at all.

most classes, 90+ is A, 80+ is B, 70+ is C, etc

[QUOTE=Lord Kuat]Bell curve for the win.

[/QUOTE]

You must die.

...which is why I said her High School probably is either hard, or her College is easy. Most people will agree that there's a lot more work involved in College than in High School. Honestly, I've not done a damn thing since I started High School except write a few papers, and I've maintained A's and B's in honors/AP classes.

The best idea for a curve I have ever seen:

(grade^½) x 10

That's quite generous for low scores.