This phrase, "Do you absolutely have to get an A?" was said by two of my professors when I asked about my grades and what I would have to do in the exams in order to achieve an A. I never provoked these answers by the way, I just simply asked "what I needed to do in order to get an A in the class" when discussing my grades. And the professors never said it to me in a mean way, on the contrary it felt like to me that this is a common thing a professor say's to students that is pursuing an A in the class.
Like would there be a special reason why professors would ask a student that? Because I've been asked that same exact question twice already by two different professors when discussing my grades half way thru the semester. Perhaps the professor will offer extra credit to help students that need an A?
Earlier today, when asked "Do you absolutely have to get an A?" by one of my professors, I said yes and told him that I was trying to get into nursing school, he said "No you don't. Most schools will let you in with a 2.8 GPA."
I currently have a low B average in the class right now so I still have the 3rd and final exam to bring up my grade. It is still very possible for me to get an A in the class.
The professor who thinks you can get into nursing school with a 2.8 GPA needs to be brought up to speed. Why don't you do him a favor by asking someone in the nursing department to give him a call to explain to him?
Also, a lot of people (myself included) do not believe that everyone SHOULD get an A in a course. We believe that the grading system should be such that the truly best students have an opportunity to demonstrate and document their superiority and be identified as the top level students. That means that the average students can not receive A's -- and we get weary when we have to spend too much of our time struggling with those "good but not great" students who complain about their grades every day and take us away from actually teaching (which is what we really want to do.)
I understand what you are saying and I tend to agree but only to a degree. In my classes we are given the critera upfront for what it takes to earn an A and it all comes down to your grades on the tests. So, if everyone in the class was to study extremely hard and all make a 90 or above then everyone should get an A, not just a select few. I realize that is not likely to happen but I just wanted to point out that it could be possible. I say this because I have had a teacher who stated that only a certain number should get A's, a certain number B's and etc. based on percentages. I can see that point but if you grade simply by numbers on tests this is not always possible because sometimes you have a class full of extremely competitive and motivated students.
Hope you can follow all that. I realize I might be rambling.
I'm from the school of thought that if everyone gets an A, the test was too easy.
The idea of a grading system is to not only give an overview of a students grasp of the subject at hand but also show their level of achievement.
Easy classes, while helping people maintain higher grades, destroy the legitimacy of the grading system.
In my microbio class 3 of us received A's, a couple of B's and the majority of the class received C's.
The grades are not supposed to be a measure of how well you study. They are supposed to measure how well you understand.
If EVERYONE in the class is so competitive and smart that they all consistently get A's then the teacher does them a disservice by not increasing the skill level.
I understand what you are saying and I tend to agree but only to a degree. In my classes we are given the critera upfront for what it takes to earn an A and it all comes down to your grades on the tests. So, if everyone in the class was to study extremely hard and all make a 90 or above then everyone should get an A, not just a select few. I realize that is not likely to happen but I just wanted to point out that it could be possible. I say this because I have had a teacher who stated that only a certain number should get A's, a certain number B's and etc. based on percentages. I can see that point but if you grade simply by numbers on tests this is not always possible because sometimes you have a class full of extremely competitive and motivated students.
Hope you can follow all that. I realize I might be rambling.
Oh ... I know it is possible to design a grading system in which everyone can get an A. It's called a "criterion referenced" grading system. As long as a person meets the criteria, they get the A regardless of where they rank in the class. A "norm referenced" grading scale takes into consideration how the student compares to the typical student. Then there are people who use criterion-referenced scoring system but try to design the measures of performance with high enough standards that only the best students will meet them all.
The real question isn't "Can a grading system be designed so that everyone can achieve and A?" The real question is: "When should should a system be used and when shouldn't one like that be used?"
Giving students the opoportunity for students who have performed poorly a chance to earn an A by doing "extra credit" gives them the same grade as the students who performed well on the tests, etc. When is that appropriate and when is that unfair to the students who performed well in the first place? That's one of the questions a professor has to consider when deciding whether or not to give extra credit opportunities.
My advice....work hard for that A. It does make a difference trust me!
all my prerequisites are B and B+ ( Im working on micro and doing excellent)- Guess what? I just got a denial letter from my Community College-in any other field, my grades are good, but not for Nursing. I'm still waiting for some other schools..I'm not giving up. I will do what ever it takes to make it there. But since you have the opportunity now to make an A do it!
Oh ... I know it is possible to design a grading system in which everyone can get an A. It's called a "criterion referenced" grading system. As long as a person meets the criteria, they get the A regardless of where they rank in the class. A "norm referenced" grading scale takes into consideration how the student compares to the typical student. Then there are people who use criterion-referenced scoring system but try to design the measures of performance with high enough standards that only the best students will meet them all.
The real question isn't "Can a grading system be designed so that everyone can achieve and A?" The real question is: "When should should a system be used and when shouldn't one like that be used?"
Giving students the opoportunity for students who have performed poorly a chance to earn an A by doing "extra credit" gives them the same grade as the students who performed well on the tests, etc. When is that appropriate and when is that unfair to the students who performed well in the first place? That's one of the questions a professor has to consider when deciding whether or not to give extra credit opportunities.
I totally see your point. I am not for extra credit so that students can earn an A. I feel that you should work hard and get what you earn. And I understand about how the poster earlier stated that a class can be too easy and that is a disservice. I was in honors classes all through high school and we were pushed to excel. I did not make all A's in those classes but I learned more than I would have in a "regular" class. I could have easily taken the regular classes and made all A's and graduated with a 4.0 and a scholarship but instead I decided to push myself and I never regreted that. Here in Texas if you graduate in I believe the top 10% or maybe it is 15% not for sure on which, but anyway if you graduate at the top then you are automatically accepted into the state colleges. I really wanted to go to the University of Texas at Austin and this would have been my easy way in. However, I decided to push myself and I am glad because it made college much easier for me. And as a side note I did get accepted into UT Austin on my own after taking classes at my community college.
But anyway, back to my point. Let's say at the community college you have an A&P class that is taught and graded on the scale that is the criterion-referenced system that only allows for the best and brightest students to achieve an A. But say you have a class with a majority of "honors" students who just graduated highschool and are already high achievers. They just might all be able to make an A. Would it be fair to make the class harder just because they are high achievers? And would that be fair to the other students in the class who are average students? Maybe it is my background that is getting into my way of thinking. Because I honestly do not think that A's should ever be handed out. They should be hard earned, but I do feel it can be possible for a majority to get those A's. Sometimes there are LOTS of high achievers in a class. Just my .
Thank you for that! I have been obsessed with trying to obtain a 4.0 to be able to gain a seat in my school's RN program. I have a pretty decent GPA 3.75 -- but I still get the "well, we'll see about you, because we take all of the 4.0 students first". At my age -- over 40, but under 50 -- this can be hard to take. Does a 4.0 student make a better nurse? Do all 4.0 students have what it takes to be a nurse? Isn't a 3.0 student with compassion, determination and perseverance worthy of a seat, too? Just my 2 cents. Thanks for sharing yours.
But anyway, back to my point. Let's say at the community college you have an A&P class that is taught and graded on the scale that is the criterion-referenced system that only allows for the best and brightest students to achieve an A. But say you have a class with a majority of "honors" students who just graduated highschool and are already high achievers. They just might all be able to make an A. Would it be fair to make the class harder just because they are high achievers? And would that be fair to the other students in the class who are average students? Maybe it is my background that is getting into my way of thinking. Because I honestly do not think that A's should ever be handed out. They should be hard earned, but I do feel it can be possible for a majority to get those A's. Sometimes there are LOTS of high achievers in a class. Just my .
I totally see your point and agree that this type of situation is the toughest one to make decisions about. I faced it as an undergraduate when I attended a school that was totally norm-referenced in it's grading. Our classroom grades were determined by how many standard deviations above or below the mean we were. The mean was set at the dividing line between a B and a C. That meant that 50% of the class was guaranteed to get a C or worse -- and only a handful of students could theoretically get an A. In fact, in many classes, NO ONE got an A. And yet, this was Duke University -- highly competitive and full of students who had been high school valedictorians like myself. By the time we got to junior and senior year, believe me, any slackers had long been weeded out. And yet, it was GUARANTEED that 50% of the class would get a C on everything. Yes, I sympathize with the scenario you give.
I think such situations call for a criterion approach or perhaps a blend of the two. The top students in such an environment still need a way to demonstrate their superiority. However, no one should probably fail as even the lowest level of performers are probably performing at and acceptable level. The world is not always neat and tidy. That's what judgment is for.
I totally see your point and agree that this type of situation is the toughest one to make decisions about. I faced it as an undergraduate when I attended a school that was totally norm-referenced in it's grading. Our classroom grades were determined by how many standard deviations above or below the mean we were. The mean was set at the dividing line between a B and a C. That meant that 50% of the class was guaranteed to get a C or worse -- and only a handful of students could theoretically get an A. In fact, in many classes, NO ONE got an A. And yet, this was Duke University -- highly competitive and full of students who had been high school valedictorians like myself. By the time we got to junior and senior year, believe me, any slackers had long been weeded out. And yet, it was GUARANTEED that 50% of the class would get a C on everything. Yes, I sympathize with the scenario you give.
I think such situations call for a criterion approach or perhaps a blend of the two. The top students in such an environment still need a way to demonstrate their superiority. However, no one should probably fail as even the lowest level of performers are probably performing at and acceptable level. The world is not always neat and tidy. That's what judgment is for.
I agree with you 100%. And when I wrote my response earlier I did think about the competitve schools and how challenging they can be. You make very good points.
.
caliotter3
38,333 Posts
The professor who thinks you can get into nursing school with a 2.8 GPA needs to be brought up to speed. Why don't you do him a favor by asking someone in the nursing department to give him a call to explain to him?