<p>Is it the norm for undergraduate and graduate students to be in the same class. The statistical analysis class is a required class for the undergraduate major, yet 1/3 of the class is filled with graduate students. The professor curves the two groups separately.</p>
<p>What difference does it make?</p>
<p>It isn’t unusual for some classes some places.</p>
<p>Is this a common practice at universities where there is a graduate population?</p>
<p>Undergrad and grad classes can easily cover the same material (if the grad students don’t have an undergrad background in the material). This particular class might be cross-listed as both an undergrad and a grad class. I took 3 grad classes as an undergrad with no issue. As long as they are curved separately I don’t see a problem. If and how commonly it happens would be unique to each university.</p>
<p>BP, which are the universities where it occurs and what types classes is this seen. I would appreciate any insight you have. Thanks.</p>
<p>It’s essential under some circumstances for graduate students to take undergraduate courses.</p>
<p>Often, a graduate student will enter a program without having taken a particular undergraduate course that he/she needs. The easiest way to solve the problem is to have the graduate student take the undergraduate course then and there. Grading graduates and undergraduates separately enables this to be done without putting the undergraduates at a disadvantage (which they otherwise might be if the course is graded on a curve).</p>
<p>I have a master’s degree in an applied field – food science. Many food science graduate students, both those pursuing master’s degrees and those pursuing PhDs, majored in basic sciences as undergraduates, such as chemistry. It’s very common for these graduate students to take several undergraduate food science courses to bring themselves up to speed on their new field. </p>
<p>Is there any reason why someone would think that having graduate students take undergraduate courses is a problem? It never occurred to me that it could be one.</p>
<p>Separately curving the two populations, in and of itself, indicates there exist an advantage to the graduate population, yes?</p>
<p>The statistical analysis class is an upper level undergrad class. It just seems to me the grad student has the advantage in type of set up. I maybe wrong but I think the professor would have to make the class a bit more rigorous since there are grad students in the class. The level of rigor would be needed to get a separation of grades for the graduate population. </p>
<p>I don’t think that’s the case. There isn’t a huge difference between a 3rd year undergraduate and a 1st year graduate student if the material being covered is new to both. </p>
<p>Even if there is a difference, that’s not always bad. By some fluke of luck when I was a freshman in college, I was placed in a French401 class, something akin to “French for the language-impaired STEM student” that focused on translating articles from juried-journals written in French into English. It was a great class, I learned a lot, and got a “B” even though the other students were at least five years older than I was and much more familiar with the subject matter in the translated articles. </p>
<p>Based on experience both as a student and teacher, I would tend to see the diverse class composition as a benefit rather than a problem. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In many graduate programs, especially academic ones, the separation of grades doesn’t have to be as fine-tuned for two reasons:</p>
<p>First, if it is a critical skill or core undergrad major course, there’s usually an expectation the graduate students need to meet a much higher bar to be a viable graduate student in his/her subsequent graduate career.</p>
<p>Second, many grad schools have higher/more compressed standards of what constitutes a “good grade”. Whereas a C- is the minimum passing grade in undergrad and Bs and B+s are decent/good grades, in grad school…B is often the minimum passing grade and B+/A- are considered decent/good grades. </p>
<p>In fact, I know of some elite grad programs…even in engineering where even getting too many Bs in a given semester can result in a stern meeting with one’s advisor and Dean of the grad school concerned about the need to improve one’s performance. </p>
<p>I know the grad population is curved to a higher grade than the undergrad population. I do not see that as fair.</p>
<p>The undergrad sits in the same location on the bell curve yet receives a lower grade??? That makes no sense to me.</p>
<p>I have been in one of those classes. By definition, an upper level undergraduate class is geared towards math/stat majors. In the class I was enrolled, graduate level business students were in the class. So in a way, the undergrads who had usually completed math through diff eq and some linear algebra might have an advantage over the grad students.</p>
<p>" I do not see that as fair. "</p>
<p>then ask to have a discussion with the professor teaching the class. Perhaps he/ she will see your point and make an adjustment. </p>
<p>Menlo, that is not a viable option. The university is not going to change its policy. I was curious if this occurs often and at what percentage of universities.</p>
<p>geo, the class has prerequisites which must be met by both groups.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most Profs will place the undergrad and grad students in separate curve groups not only to ensure fairness, but also because the grad school/advisors want to be sure the grad students can actually cut the mustard for the rest of the graduate program. </p>
<p>Cobrat, curving the grad population to a higher grade benefits that group over the undergrad group. In essence, an undergrad sitting in the same location on the curve for the undergrad population will get a b and the grad student with the same location on the grad curve gets a b+. Am I the only one that has a problem with that?</p>
<p>A “b” a failing grade, that is new to me.</p>
<p>I dont see how the grad population would be at an advantage.
Might actually be the opposite as the undergrads may have had the pre-reqs more recently.</p>
<p>“May” or may not, who is to know? The grad student could have had many more undergrad related courses, true? I still think it is unfair for both an undergrad and grad having the same location on their respective curve receive to different grades. </p>
<p>
It’s not uncommon at all colleges I have attended. The ratio between number of undergrad and grad students depends on the course. For example, Stanford engineering defines the course numbers from 200-299 as advanced undergrad and beginning grad, so it’s expected to find a good mix of both groups in such courses. Lower numbered courses are primarily undergraduates, but if the lower numbered classes are prerequisites for graduate classes, then it’s common for the class to have a significant number of graduate students as well. In some classes, grad students taking basic undergrad classes are given a different number of credits than undergrad students. I haven’t heard of the groups being curved differently within the same class. At some schools, there can be a lot of grey area between who is an undergrad and who is a grad student. For example, I simultaneously pursued 3 degrees – one undergrad degree and two grad degrees. If I haven’t formerly completed any of the degrees, but have completed an undergrad degree’s worth of credits and am primarily taking graduate courses, am I still an undergrad? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Keep in mind the grad student is likely to graded not only among his/her fellow grad students who are likely to be a select academically stronger group on average, but also curved to a higher standard. </p>
<p>Thus, a B- grad student is more likely to be placed higher if his/her performance was measured with a B- undergrad…only difference is the B- undergrad passes with some respectability whereas the B- grad student fails the course and is given a stern warning by advisor and/or grad division dean. </p>