I could see myself as being awfully happy with a C at Harvard and devastated at a C in community college.
‘Average’ needs a context.
Otara
Why? Harvard isn’t an excellent school because they require more of their students, intellectually, than other schools. Their grading process is largely commensurate with other universities. A C grade at Harvard isn’t a B grade or an A grade elsewhere. With the exception of a community college, of course. But still, a C grade isn’t something you should be content with just because you took the class at Harvard.
I once had a professor tell me a B was average and a C was below average in college, or at least for his class. Fair enough. But I got several C-'s and still graduated. So ha. Give me the C student I can work with and communicate with over the condescending A- student whose philosophy makes them think grades matter in the real world.
A professor whose class is all As is going to think something is wrong soon and make the class harder to have some diversity. A “C” at MIT is pretty good, and I’m sure lots of C students at MIT would have 4.0 GPAs at community college. Grades are largely dependent on who your classmates are, not on how well you comprehend the material long enough to take the test, then forget 90% of it in a month.
Good enough is enough if you’re happy to be average and go no where. If you want to be a sucess in your give field, you have to either strive to be the best or give your best. If you’re just going be unmemorable and average why bother? If “good enough” is enough, just go collect unemployment and welfare. That’s good enough. :rolleyes:
I agree with the person who posted above me. If you can’t do better than a C (even if it’s just lack of trying) you shouldn’t be in college. Either get your shit together (if it’s lack of trying) or realize college isn’t high school the sequel. You don’t have to go. If you don’t belong there, you’re jut brining down the value of everyone’s degree. It’s like do you have to tell ugly people maybe entering a beauty contest is a bad idea? :smack:
I’m not a lit major.
"If you want to be a sucess in your give field, you have to either strive to be the best or give your best.’
You seem to think it isnt possible for a person to do that and still get a C. People improve for a start, I know many people who got C’s and then progressed to B or A equivalents over time.
Kind of hard to not start reading some of these replies as not particularly indirect chestbeating.
Otara
In what fields do academic grades matter to your career outcome? Here is what I can think of:
Law schools (being top of your class matters for your career)
Undergrad if you are intending to go to grad school
If your goal is to become a professor, it matters
But what else? Also why are people assuming grades are the same thing as learning? My college roommate had all As, and like me (I was a B- student) he forgot the vast majority of what he learned soon after the test was taken. Grades don’t determine how competent you are to live life, or how expert you are in a field. They determine how well you learn to answer test questions relative to your classmates and professor.
I think in real life the soft skills, especially good interpersonal and intrapersonal skills, matter more for success than grades.
If people improve, then isn’t the person who always got As going improve and be better than the person who go Cs? I would hire the first over the second.
I challenge you. I think in all posts before yours more people derided the analogy than defended Cs.
And it was a terrible analogy. Terrible. The instructor obviously never painted a house.
I can find many things I disagree with in this, but I have to say I THINK it’s easy to say grade don’t matter when you didn’t get As and weren’t the top of your class. I’d take that statement more seriously from a person who had a 4.0.
If your scholarship depends upon you maintaining a 3.2 GPA then getting C’s means you fail.
It’s NOT the best, but it’s accurate. A C is 3 out of 4. I think it’s one thing to get a C, but when people see what a C is (3 out o 4) they get up in arms.
Getting a 75 per cent is great when you’re a politician looking for votes, but a 75 isn’t great on a math test.
It depends on the test. There are some tests where hardly anyone could score that high and some where it would be a shame if anybody scored less. There is nothing magic about 75% without knowing what it is being tested.
No, it is not accurate, for all the reasons given above. Painting walls is not the same as learning material or taking a test.
3 out of 4 walls isn’t a C, it’s an Incomplete.
A student with Cs graduates; the painter of 3 walls doesn’t not get the rest of the fee.
A C does not indicate perfect knowledge of 3/4 of the material and no knowledge of the rest.
I graduated with honors and I do all my own painting; I have the credentials to asset this is a terrible analogy.
Removing only 3/4 of the weeds in a garden would be good - strong visual imagery with implied ongoing deleterious effects - much better analogy.
If you really think about it, though, most work that is considered a C is imcomplete in some form. Even if it just means you don’t understand the material as COMPLETELY as the A student in the class. That’s imcomplete.
So, I still think it’s accurate. 75% = 75%. I don’t know where people are getting the idea of not doing ALL of the work means you don’t have to pay for what was done. You get 75% of the pay. You didn’t completely do the work or understand the material. You get 75% of the grade.
Better analogy would be that the painter paints the whole house, but does a mediocre job of it. The house will still sell, but it not might get quite the top dollar that it would have had he done an excellent job.
Surely then, being in graduate school, you understand the fact that the traditional academic grading system is (or at least was, at some point in time before grade inflation got out of control) designed specifically to grade along a normalized curve. So if all the current C students dropped out or weren’t accepted in the first place, then the C + 1 sigma (whatever grade that corresponds to) students become the C students.
What elitist crap - only the top 25% deserve a college education; the rest can go work at a gas station. Why would you deny the rest higher education? Do you think they’re not learning anything at all?
Then that’s a crappily written test. 
I don’t believe in making tests impossible. I think all educators should say what they mean and mean what they say. Their tests should reflect knowledge that students should know at that period. You wouldn’t take a licensing exam on shit that wasn’t covered, would you? And if you did (like, say, the Praxis for teachers, which is is crazy), then all scores above X per cent are equally valid.
Grade inflation (of any kind) is horrible. It wrecks everything: admissions, grading, GPAs, job market prospects, etc.
So yeah, John Kerry’s C average at Yale isn’t impressive.
Let me put it this way: Would you wanted to be treated by a doctor who only knew 75 per cent of what was required of him? Of course not.
College should be for serious students. You can join a frat and make bad decisions, but you should also, oh, I don’t know, do your fucking job.