| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Minus's definitely hurt, besides you can get an A-(3.7) but not an A+(4.3). | Minus's definitely hurt, besides you can get an A-(3.7) but not an A+(4.3). | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm against the +/- system. I understand its usefulness in adding greater differentiation between people, but we could take this to the extreme and give percentages rather than letter grades. Furthermore, it seems that more often than not the grade we get in a class has a degree of arbitrarity to it due to the presence of curves--which I think are great, don't get me wrong. It simply seems wrong to become so rigorous and precise in our description of something that is, by its very nature, vague and somewhat arbitrary. I also agree with the last remark regarding A- and A+; I see the value of a B+ weighing out a B-, but what is the purpose of getting an A+? What does it balance out? Is the essential message is that there is no point in trying very hard in a class? -BD | ||
Revision as of 06:52, 21 January 2010
Definitely against the plus and minus system. I got all As and one -A last semester and it wasn't a 4.0 ):
The +/- system is a two-edged sword, but in general I am against it.
I feel that the systems has more disadvantages than advantages. There now can be such a small window in certain classes to get the grade.
The problem is that most people shoot for the lowest possible grade they can get to still get the same letter grade. For example, most people aim to get a 90% in normal 10 point scale courses. These people (myself included) are the ones who feel like they are being penalized by the +/- system.
Minus's definitely hurt, besides you can get an A-(3.7) but not an A+(4.3).
I'm against the +/- system. I understand its usefulness in adding greater differentiation between people, but we could take this to the extreme and give percentages rather than letter grades. Furthermore, it seems that more often than not the grade we get in a class has a degree of arbitrarity to it due to the presence of curves--which I think are great, don't get me wrong. It simply seems wrong to become so rigorous and precise in our description of something that is, by its very nature, vague and somewhat arbitrary. I also agree with the last remark regarding A- and A+; I see the value of a B+ weighing out a B-, but what is the purpose of getting an A+? What does it balance out? Is the essential message is that there is no point in trying very hard in a class? -BD
