Yeah, I think my work ethic is way too shitty to pull off 'legendary work' the vast majority of the time. There are a few harsher graders here than others, too. It seems like this is truer of people who have been here 10+ years or went to Reed for undergrad...dunno what that says.
Reed I guess likes to clarify, since it's at the top-end of non-Ivy small liberal arts schools. Like, so people won't think it's the same as like Wesleyan in NE or Lewis & Clark here, I dunno. Esp. since they refuse to give data to college ranking places, or used to. I think it's pretty easy to get As and Bs at most public universities, but there's also a lot more people with jobs and other issues, who don't necessarily come to class...etc.
I just mentioned effort as part of trying to think about like how an A at Reed takes more effort than an A at PSU, or whatever. I agree that there should be some way of telling the person that their work was average, but I'm not entirely opposed to a grading method like Cognard's, either, where effort/improvement counts a lot toward your final grade. Because if someone took the class and did better than their peers but hardly improved at all, I don't really think that person deserves an A either. Reed definitely uses Ds and Fs. It's more like...
-Missing a lot of assignments/class = F. -Missing some assignments, not talking, missing too many classes = D. -Meeting bare requirements of work/participation = C -Participating some in class, producing papers with some serious thought/effort behind them = B -Making productive contributions to conference, doing stellar work, demonstrating involvement throughout the course = A
Obviously those change a bit depending on the prof, and some are fond of giving C-'s to 'warn' students without destroying their academic career, etc., but basically, that's my impression of how grading works here.
Lol, though, if Columbia did that, then B really would be a C, and C an F, and A an A, sorta. Except C's wouldn't fail you.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 09:05 am (UTC)Reed I guess likes to clarify, since it's at the top-end of non-Ivy small liberal arts schools. Like, so people won't think it's the same as like Wesleyan in NE or Lewis & Clark here, I dunno. Esp. since they refuse to give data to college ranking places, or used to. I think it's pretty easy to get As and Bs at most public universities, but there's also a lot more people with jobs and other issues, who don't necessarily come to class...etc.
I just mentioned effort as part of trying to think about like how an A at Reed takes more effort than an A at PSU, or whatever. I agree that there should be some way of telling the person that their work was average, but I'm not entirely opposed to a grading method like Cognard's, either, where effort/improvement counts a lot toward your final grade. Because if someone took the class and did better than their peers but hardly improved at all, I don't really think that person deserves an A either. Reed definitely uses Ds and Fs. It's more like...
-Missing a lot of assignments/class = F.
-Missing some assignments, not talking, missing too many classes = D.
-Meeting bare requirements of work/participation = C
-Participating some in class, producing papers with some serious thought/effort behind them = B
-Making productive contributions to conference, doing stellar work, demonstrating involvement throughout the course = A
Obviously those change a bit depending on the prof, and some are fond of giving C-'s to 'warn' students without destroying their academic career, etc., but basically, that's my impression of how grading works here.
Lol, though, if Columbia did that, then B really would be a C, and C an F, and A an A, sorta. Except C's wouldn't fail you.