Student Expectations & Grade Disputes...

[jketcherside]

I understand the implications of "doing what your supposed to" i.e. go to lectures, reading the assigned works, ectetera. But you have to take into account the fact that most students that took the survey had high aspirations of law school, medical school and even masters programs. Whenever students look at the GPA's of those who have been accepted into such programs, it seems a little over whelming. I mean some have GPA's of 4.5 even though a 4.0 is what we have come to think of as perfection. So to cope with the idea of an astounding new 4.5 GPA standard students would assume 4.0 would be then new average or at least as the survey revealed a3.0.

[mking11]

Kinda late on this, had some trouble getting the access.

Anyhow, people are going to claim they deserved a better grade because they were the ones that did the work. And because they did the work, the are always going to feel that it was better than someone else might, in a hopefully objective fashion. However, when someone takes a test or writes a paper it is meant as a measurement of their knowledge and understanding of a subject. Noe one is going to be right all of the time, and so the grading scale is used to determine just 'how right' they really are.

And, also, keep in mind that most of the time they are receiving points in correlation to whatever adds up to 100 percent. In essence, you are getting credit for completing the work, because you don't earn a zero score. However, beyond that you must show you actually understand the subject of what you're writing about. So, after the initial points for completion, you're earning your grade based upon quality.

The grading scale is intended to emulate real-world scenarios in the workplace. You might earn a paycheck by simply showing up, but there are also things such as bonuses and incentives for doing higher quality work than your peers. It's also meant to reflect your understanding of your studies. Jack might work his tail off to earn his A, and Jill slacks off the entire semester and thus gets a C. The opposite is true, though, that Jack might study for hours on end for a test to earn a C while Jill read the chapter once and got an A. It's a reflection of understanding.

Is it fair? Well, yes and no. But just as in life outside of school, if Jack gets a C on a math test after studying until he has numbers burned into his retina, let's hope he's an English Major. But, this is a Political Science course; and so I'll apply this to the appropriate tones.

What we have here is a comparison of ideals. On the one had you have the students who want something because they were there. The other is the faculty who want the students to earn their grade. The way this applies to Political Science, as I interpret it, is this:

A person goes into work in an apple orchard. He picks two bushels of apples by the end of the day (he's got a hurt arm.) However, his co-worker did nothing but nap, and by the end of the day he's got no apples. Boss comes in, sees the man who picked the apples and gives him 10 dollars for the day. In-turn, he gives the co-worker 10 dollars also, even though he has nothing to show for it. This is an example of the communist pay scale. Equal pay for equal time.

In another regime (universe, whatever), the same situation occurs. However, this time the man who picked the apples is paid 10 dollars per bushel by the boss, while the co-worker who did nothing gets exactly that. This is an example (though loosely literated) of capitalism.

So, capitalism; you earn your grade. Communism; everyone gets an A for showing up.