Similar to my experience in the chem classes noted above with median exam scores near 30%. My % score was not high in an absolute sense, but I was often far above the mean (professor provided detailed stats about score distribution after exams), which inspired me to start the pre-med track that included further chem classes, instead of just doing my engineering major as I had originally intended. I liked having exams that required original and complex thought with high maximum ceiling, rather than exams that expected simple regurgitation of sentences in the textbook. For this reason, I was not as big a fan of typical biology classes that emphasized memorization, with little thought.
One thing I liked about Stanford over HS is professors were more likely to reward original thought and deviating from simple regurgitating from the textbook, even when the latter is expected. For example my Intro to Stats class did not have complex thought expectations beyond simple repeating textbook approach (was on athlete āeasyā course list at time). Nevertheless, I often did not follow the textbook approach on exams, sometimes using original methods that arrived at the same answer, but used different steps. Rather than penalizing me like would typically occur in HS, the professor was so impressed that she made an effort to meet me and talk with me, in a lecture class that was composed of hundreds of students. That was the first class at Stanford in which I received an A+ final grade.
Calibrating the difficulty of exam questions does not seem to be an easy task, and many otherwise-good instructors sometimes make exams that are very easy or very difficult. I remember in the first exam in the first physics course for engineering and physics majors, the three instructors made three different exams with varying medians (something like 30s, ~50, and 80s), with resulting grade thresholds being different due to āgrading on a curveā.
More common at a āT20 schoolā is to have all freshmen take a math placement test and choose an initial math course that is appropriate for the wildly varying HS backgrounds of different students, where they are expected to be successful, rather than put students in a class that they are not well prepared for. There are typically many available starting points and different possible levels of rigor. Some students might start with a slower than standard single variable calc class. Other students might start with a rigorous, fast paced proof-based math class that skips over single variable calc entirely.
Those math and science classes with test score medians around 20-30% sound extremely familiar. Itās what I experienced at my Top 10 universityā¦I low-key kind of loved those tests. When you killed one (oooh I got a 52!) you felt like a rock star while also being well aware there was so much more to learn. Satisfying and humbling at the same time.
Princetonās frosh math placement recommendations are at Placement | Math . It says that āThe math placement workshops at registration in the Fall are designed to help you think about which course is right for you, regardless of standardized test scores.ā
Hopefully Harvard graduates are defined by something else that occurs in their adult life, rather than the undergrad college they attended. Maybe you call them an engineer, or an attorney, or the founder of well known company. In Harvardās senior survey, 6% of Harvard grads were in the lowest GPA category of <3.5. A sub 3.5 GPA could be limiting in certain fields, such as if they wanted to enter medical school, so you might be unlikely to call them a doctor.
this is a professorās full time job. Figure it out.
Some professors definitely grade too hard on purpose. Iāve met them.
All these universities give lip-service to caring about the mental health of students. When universities allow teachers to continue to intentionally fail entire classes the uni shows that it doesnāt care at all about the mental health of their students. I donāt say that lightly, as their are victims here.
Professors who create courses that are impossible to pass very well know that they are putting merit scholarships at risk. Perhaps the uni benefits - classes have to be taken over, merit is returned to the school. IDK. But for sure itās the student that suffers.
Just my 2 cents and I welcome alternative view points on this.
In the earlier examples, with median exam grades of 30%, this was not failing the entire class. Instead 30% might be curved to an A- The majority of class might get A grades, in spite of the median exam grade being 30%. Failing grades are extraordinarily uncommon at Stanford. Iāve never personally known a student who received one.
This is where Iām sitting at the moment as well. Very difficult/risky. So, I do think from the publicās vantage, this question is presently unanswered. I feel grad rates are similarly difficult to interpret given all the nuance, and hence a suboptimal metric. All I was trying to say before is that Iād lean towards collecting more clear evidence (vs declaring victory or defeat or something in the middle just with what we have today). I vote for better data. I think trying to find a system that help maximize the percentage of good academic fit (within a workable budget) is worth the effort.
I consider a āresonant educationā (academic fit that enables heightened growth) incredibly powerful. It was the reason why someone Iāve met went from a HS slacker to a student at an average LAC (where he found his direction) to a STEM PhD grad from a āT5ā school with no hooks. (I have no idea what the batting average is for this kind of story but it surely inspired me). Iām sure there are many others.
I am perhaps sensitive b/c weāve had this issue in our high school. Going back to the original topic of this thread, this is reason to have standardized testing in admissions. Itās difficult to standardize grades within some schools, much less across different school systems and states. In our public high school there are teachers for the same class&level who average As for their students, and others who average Ds and will not curve. It is unnecessarily stressful.
In my examples from decades ago, each class was curved so that the median score corresponded to a B-/C+ (less grade inflation then ā most students got passing grades, but the lower half of passing grades were in the C range, while the upper half was 2/3 B and 1/3 A or something like that). So a 30 in the hard-exam class resulted in the same grade as an 80 in the easy-exam class.
I agree, especially back then. The downside is that it does create occasional situations involving sobbing during the final or people turning in their blank final after 15 mins because they felt theyād fail and have to repeat the class anyway.
But there are also profs (my advisor was one) that just look at the work and say āI donāt think the level of achievement of anyone in this class deserves an Aā and grades accordingly.
That would be a very precipitous decline
because page 5 estimates that a 3.5+ Harvard GPA is associated with a 92-95% acceptance rate to medical school. The overall admission rate is 85-90%
The GPA cutoff for medical school acceptance for Harvard pre-meds is unclear.
Wow, thatās pretty good. They donāt even use the generic terms ācompetitive applicantsā or āsupported by committeeā to confuse the issue. Just gpa range.
Maybe, they donāt need to use those terms because it is Harvard and nearly every Harvard applicant could be considered competitive somehere. Just a thought.
Sounds right, but data would be nice only because there are complaints about āwho gets into Harvardā from time to time. Their [Harvard applicantās] research work probably doesnāt hurt.
I agree that the cutoff is unclear. I do not agree that it must be a very precipitous decline. If the average acceptance rate for 3.5 to 4.0 GPA is x% that does not mean both 3.5 GPA and 4.0 GPA applicants have the same x% chance of acceptance. This is especially true when the 3.5 GPA is far below the mean, such that the overwhelming majority of distribution is at the upper end, far above 3.5.
Another way to look at the facts is the Harvard senior survey indicates 94% of students have a 3.5+ GPA. <= 3.5 GPA is the small portion of students at the bottom of the class. Do you think the few kids who are at the bottom of the class are frequently applying to med school, and encouraged to apply to med school by Harvard advisors? Or would you expect the kids who apply med school primarily have much higher GPAs than the bottom of the class, often closer to the median senior survey Harvard GPA of 3.9? At many colleges with high med school acceptance rates, kids who are unlikely to be accepted are strongly discouraged from applying.
That said, I looked up med school acceptance rates by GPA and MCAT scores at https://www.aamc.org/media/6091/download . Among kids with top MCAT scores (I expect the overwhelming majority of kids at Harvard have top MCAT scores), the acceptance rates for a 3.2 to 3.4 GPA was ~50%. Thatās notably higher than I expected.
Perhaps some MCAT results would help clear up the picture? Those are very interesting results nonetheless.