<p>For example, at my school 90 = A. Some teachers might not round up at all, some might round up for 89.5+. One of my teachers rounded up some of the 88’s and 89’s depending on how hard he thought the student worked. </p>
<p>In your opinion, what do you think is a reasonable score to round up (or do you think there should be no rounding up at all)?</p>
<p>No rounding. (I’m sure I’ll live to regret this the day I get an 89.5 on something, but as a matter of principle. :)>-) Like I said on another thread, you have to draw the line somewhere. A B that’s close to an A is still a B. </p>
<p>No general rule; let it work on a case by case basis. If the student has an 88% but shows proficiency in the subject through other means (let’s say they submit to the teacher a valid and professional research proposal on the subject), then the teacher should be able to round that up to an A. If another student has an 89.9% but doesn’t do anything to establish proficiency in the subject, then the teacher shouldn’t feel compelled to round them up. </p>
<p>I completely understand where the above two are coming from but the usual .5 or more sounds reasonable to me. </p>
<p>The most common standard is probably 89.5+. My school used this, but one teacher (considered the best in the school) offered two extra points at the end of the year as full percentage points that he determined: one for class participation, and one for showing interest in the subject. His classes are known as the hardest in the school though, so I think it really does come down to case to case. Those extra points weren’t rounding but rather reward for genuine interest and contribution, rewarding the students that really cared.</p>
<p>It’s as stated before a case by case basis. A student that struggled hard in the class, came before/after school to work with the teacher and never really showed any disrespect towards the teacher could potentially give a 2-3 point boost, which I feel is pretty reasonable. While a student who slacked off in the class, is rude to the teacher/class, and never showed any form of motivation probably wouldn’t receive any type of boost unless it was from a F to D so that the teacher wouldn’t have to see them next year. Most people(at least the people I see talk about HS-grades vs Test Scores) say grades show dedication more than it does intelligence, so it makes sense that a truly dedicated student should get a boost from a B+ to A even though they aren’t grandmasters at the material.</p>
<p>tl:dr - pretty much what the guy above me said.</p>
<p>The entire school’s policy is that an 89.5 is rounded to an A. So I’m surprised that some of your schools say an 89.9 is a B. But I’ve never been on that cutoff myself, so it’s not a personal thing.</p>
<p>For exam exemptions (where it might require a 95) teachers are known to let you exempt if you have a 93 or 94 (you’re grade stays the same, but you get the point)</p>
<p>As far as final grades are concerned, I think “extra credit” throughout the year and no overall bump is the best policy (unless that student is close to an A vs. B (or B vs. C) , has worked their tail off, and simply can’t do it) </p>
<p>My school’s official cut off for an A- in most subjects is an 89.5, but I’ve heard stories of people being bumped up from the 88-89 ish range.</p>