<p>My high school changed to a new grading system a while ago, it was a big controversy when they first did it because they would replace letter grades with number grades on a 4.0 scale. I was a seventh grader when it happened so at the time I didn’t care, but recently I noticed how much this new system promotes grade inflation. It made me so angry and I just had to share it.</p>
<p>See with the system you need to have at least a 3.0 to pass a class. So logically speaking the lowest possible GPA for someone graduating would be a 3.0. As my math teacher put it “All be damned if even a quarter of those kids deserve a straight B average”. If you don’t achieve a three, then the class simply doesn’t count so there really is no way to graduate with anything lower than a 3.0. It’s pretty difficult to get a four in a class, you either need a perfect score in everything or rediculous amounts of extra credit (some teacher require both), but 3.5’s are pretty simple to get and they count as fours towards your GPA.</p>
<p>Maybe I’m exagratting. Anyone have an opinion?</p>
<p>@halcyonheather Well…that opens the door for a lot of discussion, but I hold that we are. I wanted to know how the system affected OP so I could give a more detailed opinion. By asking OP how they’re affected, I wanted them to elaborate on the system with a personal anecdote.</p>
<p>OP-- if a 3.5 grade counts as 4.0 points toward a GPA, how many points is a 3.0 grade? </p>
<p>I don’t know how it affects the OP, but this system could diminish the value of grades above 3.0. Not passing a class would erase the lower grade, so the difference between the lowest student and the top student in the graduating class would be potentially 1 point. Since it is difficult to get a perfect 4.0, the top students might have GPA’s of something like 3.7. </p>
<p>On a traditional 4.0 scale, a student would pass a class at about 2.0, so this scale might create a group of students who appear to be 3.0 students when they are not. On the other hand, if the school holds the students to 3.0 standards, then it might improve the academic achievements of students who might otherwise pass with 2.0.</p>
<p>Is it grade inflation or raising the bar? Some evidence would be on standardized tests. If a group of students with 3.0 at this school scores above average, or below average on the SAT/ACT then this would be telling. </p>
<p>While I think it might be unfair to top students because it doesn’t distinguish them as much from the lower achieving students, a bigger disservice might be for the students who barely pass to be accepted into college programs and not be ready for them. It would be a very expensive mistake to have students enroll in college and not be able to graduate. Since this change happened several years ago, it is possible to track the outcome of the graduating classes. </p>
<p>College admissions offices become familiar with the grading system at different schools, so I don’t think the top students have much to worry about if they are working hard in school. They will also have the standardized test scores to reflect this. Whatever the grading system, hard work pays off, so as to be ready for college no matter what the grading system is. </p>
<p>Welcome to the US education system. You will see a lot of this in college as well. In fact in college it’s worse because professional schools and grade sensitive employers will essentially discourage students taking more challenging courses (that likely grade tougher as well) that may develop valued skill sets better. At least college admissions value students who challenge themselves academically. Many employers, professional and graduate schools, not so much. They pretty much want high numbers and “people skills” (which can sometimes be faked or is non-representative in interviews. The efficacy of interviews for some professional schools has been debated in the literature and still is). At least college admissions will reward students who have both high numbers and a willingness to take on more rigor and develop skillsets that could make them successful in a rigorous college environment. However, when they get to college, they honestly should not choose to pursue a rigorous experience unless they are extremely talented depending on what career they are pursuing (I would avoid for medicine, law, and things like finance and investment banking. Doctoral Programs and many decent MBA programs give a little more GPA flexibility and emphasize the strength/depth of engagement with things like research and work experiences. For medicine, rigor is somewhat unavoidable due to overall lower grading in science, but you can choose easier science instructors and be sure to choose easier non-science course instructors to ensure that such courses are indeed padding the GPA/serving a protective function). I would imagine that if there was less inflation in colleges, there may also be less inflationary patterns in k-12 because schools would be more conscious of how they grade so as to make sure they send the right people to what are supposedly academically tough higher ed. institutions as opposed to just trying to send everyone and assuming they will be alright. </p>
<p>However, I would argue that even many people who took and did well on AP/IB would be very challenged at selective colleges if standards were as high as they are supposed. However, there are easy ways to get around being challenged so as to achieve the career goals and a lot of the undergraduate curricula will promote with soft grading or assessments that promote the surface level type of learning that most students mastered in high school. Overall, what is occurring at that school will just annoy top candidates but is hardly disgusting and is just a norm at this points. K-12 and highered is hardly about learning so these developments are no surprise. The criteria for job and post-grad placement promotes a more achievement/grade driven model of learning, so it doesn’t really matter how grades are obtained or their value, just that they are obtained so that we look good and are competitive in the process. We can develop things that make us look good in interviews via extra curricular activities, but academic engagement is often just a side show or an obstacle that can be separated from those EC endeavors. It’s all pretty much a game because good jobs and grad. school places are much less easy to come by. The students do their part and the institutions do theirs. No surprise that the same can be seen at the k-12 to higher ed pipeline. I would just let it go and continue through the pipeline as best as you can being a top student. If you actually value learning for intrinsic purposes, then so be it. Ignore the grading scale inequity and continue to do what you do best. I wouldn’t worry as much unless I was motivated primarily by grades (as are a lot of folks, which is why you have grading schemes like that) or viewed schooling mainly as a competitive process. I would be more worried about course content being watered down if I were into learning. That’s something I hate. You can’t do anything about grade inflation, but you can certainly complain about mindless or underwhelming course content or expectations. I hate combos with inflation accompanied with less rigor (could be workload or intellectual intensity) and am less apprehensive toward a inflation, high rigor classroom. </p>
<p>@shinchang it hasn’t really affected me yet I’m just a sophomore but I was curious as to what other people thought</p>
<p>@Vctory I don’t have a personal anecdote, but in this years graduating class there is one clear valedictorian by GPA, but one of the students didn’t finish their classes so their GPA got bumped up by having less classes to divide it up. That student almost got the valedictorian spot and it just made me question how fair it was
A 3.0 counts as a 3.0. So ideally everyone would graduate with at least a 3.0 or not at all, which leads to teachers giving 3.0 to students who didn’t really do that much in the class</p>
<p>I’ve been reading the book “Dumbing Down Our Kids” recently, which highlights how schools continue to lower standards and give inaccurate grades to boost self-esteem. The worst part, in addition to the grade inflation, is the watered down material.
Sigh. The perils of public education.</p>
<p>My county has a 5.0 weighted GPA system, with 5.0 being an “A” in an AP or Dual Enrollment class, 4.5 being an “A” in an Honors class, and 4.0 being an “A” in a Standard Class, all decreasing by 1.0 with each lower letter grade. What bothers me is that the school system in the county over isn’t very good, but they’re on a 6.0 weighted system. So even when my friend takes nearly all AP classes, acing them all and having a 4.6 GPA, students from the other county feel superior with 5.0 GPAs.</p>