Is the marking system for exams fair in different universities worldwide?

[JasonRox]

Nowhere have I said such a thing, so I'll assume that you are referring to someone else's post. At any rate, I'm far past the point where my GPA is a relevant concern of mine.

Obviously, knowledge is paramount to long term success. My point is that grades can handicap opportunity in the short term, perhaps severely, and that is a realistic and reasonable concern for students. Professors can be mindful of that without sacrificing quality or lowering expectations. And motivators don't necessarily have to be punitive. That is my moderate position and I have no interest in arguing the extremes.

He's not saying the grades are being used as motivators.

The simplest way to round up what he said (I think) in one line...

Continue to work hard and put focus on understanding the material. The grades and the oppurtunity to go to graduate school will come.

The only way the oppurnity to going to graduate school will not come is if your school is dumbed down and you put no effort to learn more.

Everything else he's been saying relates to his experience as a student and as a professor. We are seeing both sides of the picture here. Essentially when mathwonk got his D, he moved on. He didn't go down thinking graduate school will reject him. I found that everything he said was exactly how it is.

For those who get A's doing nothing, let them go to graduate school. They're going to have to work to pass graduate school. Also, no student will work with them since any discussion about mathematics (or whatever) will quickly display how very little they know. Who wants to work with someone who knows nothing? Not me.

Unfair grading happens everywhere and that's life. These students can walk away thinking they are a genius, but they clearly know they know nothing. Basically, they are poseurs.

 

[mathwonk]

i am on my way to a gradutae meeting to accept, or not accept, students for grad school in about an hour.

we do look at the grades and scores, but the grades do not tell us much because we do not know what they mean. I can assure you that I would much rather be looking at an application from harvard or stanford or chicago, with B's on it than one from a weaker school with A's on it.

but we do not think these grades are the whole story. after all we have also been students. the letters are much more informative than the grades. and if the student interviews here so much the better.in my own experience, i was a grad student who was recruited to grad school by a professor and offered the top fellowship in the department. one day i brought a friend to class with me, and my friend asked one question in class.

on the basis of that one question, the professor said "that student should have the fellowship you have" and they gave it to him the next year. and they were right, he was brilliant.

grades mean very little except when they are all we have to go on. as i showed here, even one sentence out of the mouth of a smart student can change everything instantly.

to bank on grades getting you where you want to go is very unrealistic.

I am not guessing here or conjecturing as jason observes, I am experienced at every level of the process, from student, to professor, to letter writer, to graduate coordinator.

i have been the guy who decides who to admit, and who sends out the admissions. at the moment i am his assistant, and am on my way to read folders now. yes i will look at the grades, but more at the letters, and most at candidates whom I know something more about, via knowing their letter writers or their schools and professors.

my point is that in almost all situations a genuinelky good student does not have to think about grades - he willc ertainly get them. but they are not enough. he should probably not spend over 10 seconds worrying about them.

 

[mathwonk]

ok i am physically evaluating folders right now. some of them which are rated highest for admission have essentially no grades at all. rather they have letters from trusted people saying things like " in top 5% of all students this program in 10 years", (a program from which we have previously admitted people) or "better than XXX" (whom we already know about),.. or "comparable to the upper quartile of your current students" (from someone knowledgeable and trusted),

or describing the persons work ethic in a seminar setting and the books he/she undertook to read, and so on.

in fact I have not yet seen a single grade that i understand fully, only words like "excellent" or "fair" or "top marks' or a number like 178, which i do not even know what is out of.

and yet we are deciding favorably on these people, with MORE confidence than if they had all A's from nowhere U, and no letters.this is real life, in real time.

 

[JasonRox]

It's nice that you share this with us mathwonk.

 

[mathwonk]

ok i have finished admissions for this round. i noticed something interesting: even a score of 800 ("perfect") on the GRE subject test in math, may only put someone in the top 89th percentile, not even the top 10%!

this is a perfect example of how useless grades are when too many people are given high ones. Even a perfect GRE score, is basically ignored as useless for meaningful distinctions.furthermore we are evaluating some people from other countries where there is a grade "above A". namely some countries use a system of EABCF, where E is excellent, A is very good, B is good, C is satisfactory and F is failing.

so what does this mean? is E like an A+? or is an A just a B?

instead of grades, we look for comments like: " this student can solve the most difficult problems, and goes further in independent reading to learn the material as deeply as possible."

"Even after stumbling on the midterm, the student took to heart his shortcomings, worked diligently and ended the course by surpassing all other 20 students in the class, some of whom had begun with more background."

"Not only does she have computational power, but she can construct proofs creatively on her own. I am sure this student has the ability and the stamina to succeed in your program and you will be happy to have her there."

try to inspire comments like that, and quit quarrelling about a few points here and there.

 

[devious_]

Thank you mathwonk for your input! It's extremely helpful, as usual.

 

[Beeza]

..

Those are some very useful tips to know Mathwonk-- especially considering that I'm a freshman. So, I'll have plenty of time to make good impressions on my professors.

On a similliar note, if there is any difference at all, do you think that recommendations from professors or possibly research scientists from the lab that you work in will look better on graduate school applications? However, I'm not even sure if research scientists are typically willing to write letters of recommendation.

Thanks!

 

[JasonRox]

Those are some very useful tips to know Mathwonk-- especially considering that I'm a freshman. So, I'll have plenty of time to make good impressions on my professors.

On a similliar note, if there is any difference at all, do you think that recommendations from professors or possibly research scientists from the lab that you work in will look better on graduate school applications? However, I'm not even sure if research scientists are typically willing to write letters of recommendation.

Thanks!

That's what he's been saying. Letters of recommendations play a big role.

Sure, anyone will write a letter of recommendation if they think you're good. The question is... is it a good letter of recommendation?

 

[Beeza]

That's what he's been saying. Letters of recommendations play a big role.

Sure, anyone will write a letter of recommendation if they think you're good. The question is... is it a good letter of recommendation?

I'm sorry I may not have made the question clear enough. I meant it as what recommendation letter would have greater "pull" among graduate school applications? One from a research scientist or a professor that has seen your in-class performance.

 

[JasonRox]

I'm sorry I may not have made the question clear enough. I meant it as what recommendation letter would have greater "pull" among graduate school applications? One from a research scientist or a professor that has seen your in-class performance.

It was mentionned later. His last post discusses that idea.

I don't blame you for missing it. I wouldn't have read all the posts this late into the discussion although I do recommend reading his posts though.

 

[mathwonk]

well a recommendation is valued according to the espertiose of the recommender. so a recommendation from a research mathematician is probably weightier in regards to researcha bility, but depending on what he says, a lab supervisor or research scientist can be helpful too.

he m ight say that you have a real scientists mentality, curiosity, tenacity, intelligence, and a creative response to stimulating problems.

that comment would interest anyone i would think. som try to be concerned more with what you do rather than what they say.

most good students are surprized at the nice things their advisors fnd to say about them.

 

[Beeza]

Thank you. Sorry for missing one of your posts and having you repeat yourself :).

 

[JasonRox]

Thank you. Sorry for missing one of your posts and having you repeat yourself :).

Are you Canadian?

I'm just curious because I'm Canadian and that I noticed that Canadians (ourselves) apologize for almost everything even when there is nothing to apologize for. :tongue2:

I'm sure other areas have the same attitude.

 

[Beeza]

haha. No. I'm born and raised in the states (MA/NH). The apologies are an attempt to not tick off the big guys

 

[JasonRox]

haha. No. I'm born and raised in the states (MA/NH). The apologies are an attempt to not tick off the big guys

Just don't start questions like "1/0 = infinity?" or "0.99999... = 1". Things like that make them go crazy especially when you have your own theory.

 

[leright]

Test scores and grades say little more than nothing about how much someone understands about a subject, period. As was stated above, from the graders standpoint, there is almost always no percieveable difference between the student that has a deep understanding of the material and the student that memorizes everything. This is sometimes troublesome to me, especially since some students will be competing for the same grad school positions as me and might have better grades but far less understanding, so no matter how much I lie to myself by saying "grades do not matter...learning does", grades DO matter.

So, to mathwonk, grades do matter, unfortunately, even though they are innacurate portrayals of someones capability and understanding.

I guess I try my best to communicate with my professors outside of class to at least show them that I have a deep understanding, despite my less than perfect grades, and that professor might write me a decent letter of recommendation.

 

[JasonRox]

Test scores and grades say little more than nothing about how much someone understands about a subject, period. As was stated above, from the graders standpoint, there is almost always no percieveable difference between the student that has a deep understanding of the material and the student that memorizes everything. This is sometimes troublesome to me, especially since some students will be competing for the same grad school positions as me and might have better grades but far less understanding, so no matter how much I lie to myself by saying "grades do not matter...learning does", grades DO matter.

So, to mathwonk, grades do matter, unfortunately, even though they are innacurate portrayals of someones capability and understanding.

I guess I try my best to communicate with my professors outside of class to at least show them that I have a deep understanding, despite my less than perfect grades, and that professor might write me a decent letter of recommendation.

Grades don't matter. A professor, mathwonk, himself confirmed that.

They only matter to a certain extent. If you got a B+ average or higher, then you're good. If you don't, then now I may become skeptical myself on whether or not you understand it.

I don't have the best grades, but I talk to my professors from time to time. One of them already let me know that if I ever need a letter, he'd be happy to write one for me. It was a great feeling to hear that. It was better than getting 120% on a test, which I never did ever do, but I know it's better!

 

[Maxwell]

I assume you're talking about a B+ in Canada, correct? Because a B+ in the US is roughly a ~3.6-3.7, which is very competitive and a fantastic average.

 

[JasonRox]

I assume you're talking about a B+ in Canada, correct? Because a B+ in the US is roughly a ~3.6-3.7, which is very competitive and a fantastic average.

I maintained a B+ in my first year and I never went to school. I doubt that's being competitive.

I thought it was more like ~3.2.

 

[0rthodontist]

At my school a B+ is a 3.3. But it does depend on the school. A B+ at Harvard wouldn't be unimpressive. For most of my courses a B+ here means you didn't get it or weren't thorough in your assignments.

 

[JasonRox]

http://www.graduateshotline.com/gpa/index.html

That's what I looked at.

 

[leright]

I assume you're talking about a B+ in Canada, correct? Because a B+ in the US is roughly a ~3.6-3.7, which is very competitive and a fantastic average.

A B+ in the US is about a 3.333 gpa. It is respectable, but not great.

 

[JSBeckton]

The tougher your teacher is the luckier you are. that is why paris island is tough, so the marines will more liklely survive afterwards.

As a veteran of the Corps I find your idealology a bit skewed. You cannot compare bootcamp to college. If you barely finish bootcamp, you are forever called a "Marine", If you barely graduate college, you are forever, "unemployed".

And besides, every Marine I've ever met has not had an easy time in bootcamp, I've had easy clases and hard clases. I believe the point here is that hard or easy, students deserve consistancy. Bootcamp consistantly sucks the same for everybody, not some people who get a bad Di or a good DI, everybody!

I think that if a student has one of those prefessors and has a solid B, he's not going to worry about that final too much because he knows that that perfect A he needs to bump up is unlikely with the professors grading. Now I'm not saying give up, a Marine never gives up, but he does know that the "situation dictates", and "adapt and overcome", well that might mean blowing that class off and investing your efforts where that are more likely to effect the outcome of the situation. Its called damage control and the final result unfortuante.

Professors do not always grade hard because they want you to learn more, the do it because they are miserable teaching and they want to feel good about themselves at your expence. Just my opinion.

 

[matt grime]

Professors do not always grade hard because they want you to learn more, the do it because they are miserable teaching and they want to feel good about themselves at your expence. Just my opinion.

Thank you for sharing your opinion upon my motivations (and others') for demanding high standards (actually I'd say demanding moderate standards); nice to know it's not because I'm an idealist, or wish for better for my students, but because I'm a bitter and twisted individual.

(And it's spelled ideology.)

 

[leright]

At my school a B+ is a 3.3. But it does depend on the school. A B+ at Harvard wouldn't be unimpressive. For most of my courses a B+ here means you didn't get it or weren't thorough in your assignments.

A B+ at Harvard is unimpressive. Grade inflation is a major problem at Harvard.

 

[JSBeckton]

Thank you for sharing your opinion upon my motivations (and others') for demanding high standards (actually I'd say demanding moderate standards); nice to know it's not because I'm an idealist, or wish for better for my students, but because I'm a bitter and twisted individual.

I can't remark on your grading because I have never had you. I believe that if there are 150 students in a class and they are all smart and determined enough to get into the University, and they average a 40% on a test, maybe, just maybe, its not the students... its the test. The best professor I ever had once said, " I do not curve grades, curving grades is a method used by professors who are too lazy to write a good test." I agree with that, and I know I'm not alone.

 

[matt grime]

I believe that if there are 150 students in a class and they are all smart and determined enough to get into the University, and they average a 40% on a test, maybe, just maybe, its not the students... its the test..

I disagree with your premise, never mind the conclusion. Getting into a university is not hard, in general. The standards demanded at university ought to be (and are in most cases) higher than those previously expected; previous performance is not a particularly good indicator of ability. Numerics are not important: the average student is almost by definition one who gets an average mark, it doesn't matter what that mark is.

Exams where students are able to average 60% or higher on raw marks are bad exams since they don't let the good students shine; the questions should be hard, the marks should be low, the good shall prosper (ie don't bother to inflate the actual mark, just give it as a raw mark, let the teaching staff then define the boundaries accordingly) and if none makes the grade so be it; there is no need to see 70% in order to be happy with your performance.

But of course I have a completely different perspective on it than you and wish for courses to measure different things than you do. I would, for instance, also demand that most of what is taught in the first two years of an average US university's mathematics programs be put in high school where it belongs, and I am equally depressed at the necessity to alter UK maths degrees to accept that even the well qualified students are not familiar with matrices or differential equations on arrival.

 

[JasonRox]

I disagree with your premise, never mind the conclusion. Getting into a university is not hard, in general. The standards demanded at university ought to be (and are in most cases) higher than those previously expected; previous performance is not a particularly good indicator of ability. Numerics are not important: the average student is almost by definition one who gets an average mark, it doesn't matter what that mark is.

Exams where students are able to average 60% or higher on raw marks are bad exams since they don't let the good students shine; the questions should be hard, the marks should be low, the good shall prosper (ie don't bother to inflate the actual mark, just give it as a raw mark, let the teaching staff then define the boundaries accordingly) and if none makes the grade so be it; there is no need to see 70% in order to be happy with your performance.

But of course I have a completely different perspective on it than you and wish for courses to measure different things than you do. I would, for instance, also demand that most of what is taught in the first two years of an average US university's mathematics programs be put in high school where it belongs, and I am equally depressed at the necessity to alter UK maths degrees to accept that even the well qualified students are not familiar with matrices or differential equations on arrival.

Getting a hard exam wouldn't be a bad idea.

I just think we must differentiate between hard and annoying.

Hard questions should be something where you need to "make the connection" to solve.

Annoying is just something everybody knows how to do, but instead you made it longer to solver. These types of questions are utterly useless in my opinion. They seem hard because no one bothers to solve such absurd questions.

Also, if someone really enjoyed mathematics, they should finish their mathematics degree with lots of background regardless of what school because their passion would have driven them to learn more outside of the school.

 

[Dumbobaby]

Getting a hard exam wouldn't be a bad idea.

I just think we must differentiate between hard and annoying.

Hard questions should be something where you need to "make the connection" to solve.

Annoying is just something everybody knows how to do, but instead you made it longer to solver.

I think it is also one of many ways to measuring one's ignorance.
If you have experience and a strong background on i.e math, you sure can understand how hard it is to feel when you fail at a very simple problem or is judged by so-called professors who are much more stupid, for example.

Also, if someone really enjoyed mathematics, they should finish their mathematics degree with lots of background regardless of what school because their passion would have driven them to learn more outside of the school.

Here is to say since what you say really makes me chuckle.
In life as a fact, it is not what you like or what you do not like that decides what you can get, but those that benefit you most or more at a certain moment urge you to make a choice...and you are not teh one who have teh right to do things you think you like. Professionals all have high adaptability to actively change their behaviors from time to time... Are you a professional enough to understand that fact of real life ? I would be delighted to give more details if that is not well understood..!

 

[0rthodontist]

What makes a good course?

Probably the (completed) course I got the most out of was my linear algebra course. The homework problems were really simple, the tests were really simple, and we moved slowly. In lectures, proofs were always done rigorously but we were not tested deeply on them. The instructor was a very good lecturer who had humility and was not afraid to be wrong sometimes. Despite the slow pace and superficial requirements, I found the time on my own to do everything else in the book.

The runner up was my discrete math course. This was actually two courses, and again everything was superficial and slow-moving. The lecturer was not particularly good (in fact she was nuts). I didn't manage to do everything in the book, seeing as the book was a thousand pages long and could probably serve as a text for a graduate course, but I went beyond what the course demanded.

What I see in common between these two courses is the slow pace and the focus on easy fundamentals, giving me freedom to pursue the subjects as far as I saw fit.

What if every math course were taught with an easy, simple, fundamentals-oriented approach like I described, with a requirement that each student go beyond that and do a large amount of self-motivated work in the subject? And I don't necessarily mean a project, just some kind of work, maybe meaning fifty challenging problems from the book (of the studen't choice) or some presentations of research papers by other people (again, student chooses the papers). The problem would be placing the extra work on the student's initative, without psychologically giving the impression of "assigned work," but ensuring that the students actually do a respectable amount of extra work.

Is my experience on what courses allowed me to learn the most different from others' experiences?

 

[JSBeckton]

I disagree with your premise, never mind the conclusion. Getting into a university is not hard, in general.

Sure its not hard to get into a University, but its not easy either. It takes some dedication and shows that one is a good student. I think your comment on the average being below 60% is just funny. A good student can't "shine" if the average is 75%? If you think that it helps when everyone gets a 60% you need a reality check. It might encourage a few but I bet it discourages more and takes the motivation away.

And if that's what you want to do, fine, the problem is that everyone dosen't agree or grade like you. It makes me mad when I fail a hard test and someone else with a easier professor gets an A even though I studied harder. Now this might tempt you to claim that a harder teacher made me study harder when in fact I just do my best and avoid that teacher thereafter.

I guess my point is that students want to learn but they also want their grades to reflect what they have learned, and with the inconsistancy in grading, I think that that is not always the case. Every section should have the same average. You probabally think that putting "trick" questions on an exam let's the "bright" students shine when in fact it might just be that a few people happen to figure it out, does that make them smarter or does that just mean that they were lucky?

Let me put it this way, I think that if you put 10 trick questions on an exam, and the average person figured out 3 of them, the 3 would all be different for the most part, that's your anwser right there and it shows that the "trick" question shows luck more than knowlage. Are you testing for luck or knowlage?

And as far as your comment on sub-par US university standards, I know that Americans have fallen behind the math curve but to enter college with Calc1,2,3, DiffEQ, and linear algebra completed is a bit of a streach. Are you telling me that UK engineering students enter college having completed all of those courses?