Woohoo....A 74%.

DS graduated from a small liberal arts school and told me many who validated STEM classes rued the day they decided to do so.
 
Does anyone know if organic chemistry is tougher?

That’s on the schedule next year. We have heard horror stories from different colleges.
 
Organic chem is a tough one at any school. It is tough at USNA. It is definitely the first step in weeding out those who are on the medical
path at USNA or really anywhere to be honest.
 
In the category of nightmares associated with any level of school, I have one that features me struggling to remember how the Wolff-Kishner Reduction works, and somehow a whiff of lab-created banana esters infuses the dream.
 
Also, it sounds like (at least some) profs are sympathetic to the idea that not everyone is in the same environment with the same resources. And online learning is a new thing that both teachers and learners are figuring out on the fly. So I would expect that final letter grades would be somewhat more lenient than in other semesters. (Though admittedly I am projecting what I would do, as a retired prof.)
 
DKTKT said:
Also, it sounds like (at least some) profs are sympathetic to the idea that not everyone is in the same environment with the same resources. And online learning is a new thing that both teachers and learners are figuring out on the fly. So I would expect that final letter grades would be somewhat more lenient than in other semesters. (Though admittedly I am projecting what I would do, as a retired prof.)
Click to expand...

A curve would be fine. But there are many that got excellent grades as well.

I suspect the final exam grades and final class grades aren’t that much different from previous years overall. I would be interested in seeing the comparisons.
 
DKTKT said:
Also, it sounds like (at least some) profs are sympathetic to the idea that not everyone is in the same environment with the same resources. And online learning is a new thing that both teachers and learners are figuring out on the fly. So I would expect that final letter grades would be somewhat more lenient than in other semesters. (Though admittedly I am projecting what I would do, as a retired prof.)
Click to expand...
I mentioned the curve to my DD. As she understands it, since Chem is a class wide course, the curve works that way as well. The curve would be across the entire class not just one class. That is, it is not at one instructors decision, but all instructors of Chem 2. Seems a bit inequitable considering some instructors are better than others, but statistically it probably works out.
 
A1Janitor said:
A curve would be fine. But there are many that got excellent grades as well.
Click to expand...
Interesting... USNA bases GPA on A,B,C.... No A+, A-... So an A is an A, a B is a B...

A person could have a high 'B' in a class, and a curve could bring him/her to a low A. Another person could have an outright high A. But in the end they are both 'As'... The person who got the A via the curve could theoretically end up with a higher OOM than the person who had the higher original grade, thanks to the curve.
 
Capt MJ said:
This thread is a keeper to use as a reality-setter for incoming plebes.
Click to expand...

And their parents... as I am sure I am not the only parent with high expectations for my child(ren)... and I will need to learn to be happy too!! :)
 
Trust your mid to figure it out. They will find the right balance of input of study time for a grade yield that eventually feels okay when balanced with enjoyable extracurricular activities, sports, liberty time, etc. There is a sliding scale, and at some point, most find their equilibrium.

If they are happy with a C, you be happy with a C, and let them talk about it or not, as they choose. There are so many ways to get help, from office hours, EI, peer tutoring, in company help, Midshipman Academic Center, that no mid should feel they are without lifelines.

See link below. Be sure to check out the left-side hamburger menu.

www.usna.edu

Introduction

Logo
www.usna.edu

Be aware too all incoming plebes will elect whether or not grades, conduct, performance or health issues can be disclosed or discussed with parents. When a parent calls a USNA Commandant staff member to discuss their mids, the first thing the BattO, Company Officer or Senior Enlisted Advisor does is jump into the mid data system to bring up their elections.
 
brewmeist said:
Interesting... USNA bases GPA on A,B,C.... No A+, A-... So an A is an A, a B is a B...

A person could have a high 'B' in a class, and a curve could bring him/her to a low A. Another person could have an outright high A. But in the end they are both 'As'... The person who got the A via the curve could theoretically end up with a higher OOM than the person who had the higher original grade, thanks to the curve.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. As a personal note - my son doesn’t benefit from a curve. But hopes there is one for his classmates.

I know a case where a person got a 4.0 last semester with low 90s in all classes. But a student got less than a 4.0 despite having high 90s in most classes and an 89.7 in one class.

I heard there is a discussion to go to the plus and minus system - which would be more fair in my opinion.

Also - this isn’t necessarily a SA issue.

I will never forget as a math major taking a class. I had a 102 average and got an A-. My brother had an 80 something and got a b+. Teacher said the curve hurt me. One student had 104 and got an A+. One had 103 and got an A. I got A -. Class average was in 70s - they got Cs. My brother put no effort in and got a similar grade as me. Professor told
me that is how he was graded in his Ivy League classes.
 
True, it's not strictly an SA issue. Actually, I don't even consider it an issue. It is what it is. The thing unique about it with the SAs is that all students are ranked.
 
A1Janitor said:
I know a case where a person got a 4.0 last semester with low 90s in all classes. But a student got less than a 4.0 despite having high 90s in most classes and an 89.7 in one class.
Click to expand...

Assessment is not an exact science, and certainly not reliable to within 0.3%. I remember having similar situations when starting as a prof when I would grade individual assessments very generously, to make up for the subjectivity, and then assign strict grades at the end. It led to many distraught students who argued that they were very close to the next higher grade (even with +- grading schemes). So it *may* not be as painfully close as it appears. (Unless the prof is just a %$#@, and certainly there are plenty of those in academia, as in anything.)

The way we currently assess in US higher ed has many problems anyhow. E.g., Formative versus summative. If 2 students walk out of a course at the end with the exact same understanding of the material, should they get the same course grade? Our current system says No to that, because, e.g., midterms are often summative, and end up assessing how fast you learned the material, not just that you understood it in the end.

Also, one could argue that the goal is clearly stated as meeting a 90 minimum threshold to get the A. The first student clearly did not allocate their efforts well. If you are getting high 90's in all classes but one, then you are clearly putting too much into those classes, and not enough into the one you need to. I mean, we seem to accept that the speed at which students learn content has a significant impact on grades and so GPA. Why wouldn't effort allocation and management be fair game as well? Should it be?

And as far as its impact on OOM, is it just the academics that has this kind of issue? E.g., in the physical assessment, it doesn't matter that one mid barely eeeks out reaching the max in each section, and another mid could could have gotten 150% in each section, they both get the max assessment, yeah? (<-- real question, I am admittedly a little fuzzy on how that works) That would be similar to a 90 and a 100 average in a class both getting A's? But they actually stop you when you've maxed out an area on physical tests? Wouldn't that be similar to a student who has low 90's in all their classes (i.e., they have maxed out their GPA) redirecting their energies into other things that effect OOM, instead of going for the higher 90's?

We could just give raw numeric scores in everything for determining a ranking? But then a student with 3 courses 100, 100, 50 (total 250) is better than an 80, 80, 80 (total 240). Is that okay? Because in current system, it's the opposite; the over all GPA's would be 2.67 and 3, respectively.

Okay, sorry. I will climb off soap box and stop playing devil's advocate now. I spent decades struggling with authentic assessment in my classrooms, so its problems raise my hackles just a bit. :unhappy:😜
 
DKTKT said:
Assessment is not an exact science, and certainly not reliable to within 0.3%. I remember having similar situations when starting as a prof when I would grade individual assessments very generously, to make up for the subjectivity, and then assign strict grades at the end. It led to many distraught students who argued that they were very close to the next higher grade (even with +- grading schemes). So it *may* not be as painfully close as it appears. (Unless the prof is just a %$#@, and certainly there are plenty of those in academia, as in anything.)

The way we currently assess in US higher ed has many problems anyhow. E.g., Formative versus summative. If 2 students walk out of a course at the end with the exact same understanding of the material, should they get the same course grade? Our current system says No to that, because, e.g., midterms are often summative, and end up assessing how fast you learned the material, not just that you understood it in the end.

Also, one could argue that the goal is clearly stated as meeting a 90 minimum threshold to get the A. The first student clearly did not allocate their efforts well. If you are getting high 90's in all classes but one, then you are clearly putting too much into those classes, and not enough into the one you need to. I mean, we seem to accept that the speed at which students learn content has a significant impact on grades and so GPA. Why wouldn't effort allocation and management be fair game as well? Should it be?

And as far as its impact on OOM, is it just the academics that has this kind of issue? E.g., in the physical assessment, it doesn't matter that one mid barely eeeks out reaching the max in each section, and another mid could could have gotten 150% in each section, they both get the max assessment, yeah? (<-- real question, I am admittedly a little fuzzy on how that works) That would be similar to a 90 and a 100 average in a class both getting A's? But they actually stop you when you've maxed out an area on physical tests? Wouldn't that be similar to a student who has low 90's in all their classes (i.e., they have maxed out their GPA) redirecting their energies into other things that effect OOM, instead of going for the higher 90's?

We could just give raw numeric scores in everything for determining a ranking? But then a student with 3 courses 100, 100, 50 (total 250) is better than an 80, 80, 80 (total 240). Is that okay? Because in current system, it's the opposite; the over all GPA's would be 2.67 and 3, respectively.

Okay, sorry. I will climb off soap box and stop playing devil's advocate now. I spent decades struggling with authentic assessment in my classrooms, so its problems raise my hackles just a bit. :unhappy:😜
Click to expand...
I have never thought of midterms as you have described. Eye opener! Made me think of a marathon race... The first person to cross the finish line is the winner. It doesn't matter where he was at the 13.1 mark. Or the first mile, or... All that matters is where he was at the end of the race.
 
You don’t have to play devil’s advocate. You take out of your discussion that each student takes different professors.

Sometimes it is a professor. In this one class - most people were happy to get the B. Meanwhile, students with B averages overall got an A from the easier teachers. Some teachers get reputations not to take. Sometimes it is the luck of the draw.

I don’t buy your marathon argument necessarily. The person who crams the material in the end into short term memory that gets a 95 on a final test while putting forth no effort throughout the semester with an 85 average “knows” the material better than the person who works throughout the semester earning 94s the whole way, including the final? Hardly. (That would have made me a better student ;) ).

Of course ... someone that gets 98s in 5 subjects and an 89.7 in a sixth ... compared to someone who gets a 91 in all six (let’s assume the same teachers - which isn’t true) is not exactly your extreme example fwiw.

A professor I know said to me that most professors would agree that a person getting a 95 on a final will do substantially worse if given the test 6 months later. Also - the weight of the tests are given with syllabus at the beginning - so the person who finishes the marathon with a higher grade didn’t allocate his resources appropriately. Finally - many finals that are cumulatively necessarily don’t include all material of the prior tests, so aren’t necessarily a reflection of knowledge of all subject matter (for instance the first three tests might have 50 questions while the final has 75).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top