bearsayswoof

I'm curious as to what GPA is needed to achieve summa cum laude and magnum cum laude. On the website it says top 2% get summa and top 15% get magna. What gpa does this translate to approximately?

crnchycereal

I don't have a lot of data points to base this off of, but my estimate would be that summa cum laude is at least a 3.95 or higher. Magna cum laude is probably closer to 3.8 or higher. I made magna with a 3.93.

bearsayswoof

dayum! 3.95? thats pretty intense. especially considering an A- brings ur gpa down. thanks for the info.

crnchycereal

Well, you have to keep in mind that summa is only top 2%, so that's about 10 kids. And yeah, you clearly have to get almost all A's throughout your four years. Many of the summa cum laude graduates were also math/science majors. Not to say that majors in those fields are easy, but for people who are just naturally talented in them, it's easier to get A+'s.

Jrock

I was going to refute that claim, but you're right and there's no need to start a div. war here. <MMString:LoadString id="insertbar/linebreak" />
But the magnas are quite evenly distributed between the arts and the sciences, and there are not a few history majors here.

It's not always possible to make it up there. Take a couple art studios, or major in music or even any other really artsy subject, and A's become very hard to come by. Still, there are lots of other prizes to be won...

bearsayswoof

Thanks for the link Jrock. But now I'm curious- at Williams are science classes considered easier than humanities classes? At nearly all the other schools I looked at the opposite was true.

jeke

Science classes aren't necessarily easier, but they grade more consistently (I imagine this is true pretty much everywhere, not just Williams). For example, if you're good at physics, then getting A's in physics classes is mostly a matter of learning the concepts and putting in the work - it may be a lot of work, but if you do it and get the right answers, you're pretty much guaranteed an A. It's completely possible to turn in a "perfect" physics assignment (or math, bio, CS, etc.). On the other hand, there's no such thing as a perfect English paper, or a perfect art studio assignment, so your grade depends a lot more on the prof's particular preferences and idiosyncrasies. Even if you're good, you probably won't click perfectly with every single prof that you take a class from, so chances are you'll eventually get a less-than-perfect grade. Thus the kids with perfect grades are often the ones who take nothing but science classes.

The flip side is that it's much harder to fail as a humanities student. In a philosophy class, you can ignore all the readings, turn in completely incoherent stream-of-consciousness papers week after week, and still walk out with a C or a D. That doesn't work in a math/science class - if you don't know your stuff, you're screwed.

Jrock

It depends on whom you're talking to. Some science students might argue that humanities courses are way easier than science courses, but they would probably agree that grading is more subjective in arts classes. On the other hands, some humanities students may hold fast to the claim that those who take science classes are naturally good in those subjects. [I believe this is never always the case]. Bear in mind, though, that these are hypothetical instances of mine.

I really do not think that one particular division is easier than the other. Personalities do differ and every subject has its challenges. While grading might be subjective in arts courses, there is such a thing as an excellent paper, and a mediocre one. Excellence is any discipline requires hard work and thoughtful input. I am a double major in a science and an art, and I have experienced these issues.

However, if you're focused on the grade, then of course, the sciences are straightforward. But this is not always true. You might take a chemistry class and consistently make a lower grade than you think you deserve. Things might not always work out in lab. A professor may be not be pleased with the quality of your work. And of course, you might have a very understanding professor who prefers to grade you on the rate of your improvement rather than your overall performance. So I tend to think that the professor matters a lot, much more than the divisional characteristic of your discipline. Two professors might teach the same class and one will make it 3 times as demanding as the other. I've had experiences on both sides in all three divisions.

Some classes might be easy, but any class will be as challenging as you want it to be. I think that if the grades are the most important thing, then there's no point to learning.

I'm sorry, I'm sure I haven't answered your question. But as I said, it depends on whom you ask. At one point, I said history was probably one of the easiest subjects, but then, I had only taken one class, with a professor who happened to be quite a lenient grader. Sometimes I talk to people and I tell them the classes I take, and they go, "Whoa!" But, no deal. I've been in several conversations, where someone says, "Gosh, math is so hard..." and other person replies, "Very easy stuff. Doesn't take time," or something along those lines. We all have our strengths.