Big deal. Undergrad at Oregon is the same as at Stanford.
Where is the other 0.02? Pathetic.
W/O Stanford University illegally limiting Asian undergraduates, what would Elise Cranny's GPA be?
It's really something how people on this board turn something positive into something negative or questionable. It's really a gift.
Happy 2017!
That's wonderful. She can get a top job back in her parents country of Iran ;-)
What happened to Ben Saarel being a nuclear physicist that was slowing down his racing?
UO Student wrote:
Big deal. Undergrad at Oregon is the same as at Stanford.
True, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to the thread. Many of us realize that the laws of biology are the same at every school. However, I guessed the point of the thread was her sport and her grades in her major and not where she is doing the sport or where her grades are being gotten from. I read fast so maybe I missed something.
Stanford is known for grade inflation. The average grade given in 2011 at Stanford was 3.57:
http://www.gradeinflation.com/Stanford.html
By contrast, when I was at UCLA, I remember some professors specifically saying that they curved the grades based on a C+/B- average or 2.50. Looks like the real average the years I was there was 2.9, but that's far from giving A- as the average grade for everyone at the university.
Grade curving makes no sense. Curving grades means that GPAs are not comprabale between schools or even between classes within the same school. With curving, you don't actually know how much the student knows.
What if every track curved its times differently? Hpw are we supposed to know how fast the runners actually ran?
Easy to understand wrote:
Grade curving makes no sense. Curving grades means that GPAs are not comprabale between schools or even between classes within the same school. With curving, you don't actually know how much the student knows.
What if every track curved its times differently? Hpw are we supposed to know how fast the runners actually ran?
Hey, that's just what they told us for many of my engineering classes. It was beyond my control as a student. And what you say about comparability is true. Grades are not comparable between schools or even classes within the same school. Depending on the class and subject matter, an engineering professor can easily make a test where no one will get even 50% correct with the time allowed for the test. There might be a problem with the test being too difficult, but it is what it is at that point. That doesn't mean that everyone fails. The test is just too difficult for 90% to mean an A. So the professor might decide that 40% on a particular test is C+/B- and scale the other grades around that. And I'm sure that the professor has some discretion and decide that maybe not everyone below average in a particular class is really only doing C or D work, so the 2.5 got inflated to 2.9 on average.
Yes but the average student at Stanford is better than the average student at UCLA, so it tends to even out.
I don't know that the average student at UC Berkeley is dumber than the average Stanford student.
Keep bragging o.k. We know UO is known as the Oxford University of the USA.
And the average 2011 Stanford student isn't 0.7 grade points smarter than the average 1987 UCLA student. Or 1.09 grade points smarter than the average 1936 Stanford student.
Do you know that stanford grades on a curve? If they don't, demographics don't matter.
Having been at both schools, I can say the average student at Berkeley isn't as good as Stanford (because Berkeley is a big state school so it will have a larger range) but the top students at both are great.
Beyond a certain point, one cannot accurately compare the academic performance of two individuals based on their respective GPAs.
Grade inflation has made this virtually impossible.
dgdgdfgd wrote:
Yes but the average student at Stanford is better than the average student at UCLA, so it tends to even out.
Based on what? I don't see how you would know what the average student is like or what that has to do with curved GPAs.
Oh come on Stanford has significantly harder admission standards (UCLA has to accept many more people because it is a state school).
In come the arguments from people who went to their local state school and/or couldn't get into schools like Stanford...