80% Yale Grades A & A-

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/nyregion/yale-grade-inflation.html

Knew this was the case at Harvard & Brown, basically just as bad at Yale. Graduating seniors have a 3.7 average gpa. At this point, I feel like major matters more than college. Privates don’t give anyone lower than a B or C, but mostly just As.

[Anonymous]

I dunno, man. If lots of them were getting Cs and Ds, somebody on this board would be citing it as evidence that Yale is obviously admitting unqualified applicants.

[Anonymous]

The coddling that happens in K-12 continues on.

[Anonymous]

Well, when they're letting in morons like Jared Kushner, what do you expect?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, when they're letting in morons like Jared Kushner, what do you expect?

Actually, they’re not. Kushner went to Harvard.

Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/nyregion/yale-grade-inflation.html

Knew this was the case at Harvard & Brown, basically just as bad at Yale. Graduating seniors have a 3.7 average gpa. At this point, I feel like major matters more than college. Privates don’t give anyone lower than a B or C, but mostly just As.

The point of education, and grade giving as a measure of progress, is mastering material and spreading knowledge. It is NOT to manufacture a neat bell curve centered on B- or C+ artificially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/nyregion/yale-grade-inflation.html

Knew this was the case at Harvard & Brown, basically just as bad at Yale. Graduating seniors have a 3.7 average gpa. At this point, I feel like major matters more than college. Privates don’t give anyone lower than a B or C, but mostly just As.

The point of education, and grade giving as a measure of progress, is mastering material and spreading knowledge. It is NOT to manufacture a neat bell curve centered on B- or C+ artificially.

+100.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, when they're letting in morons like Jared Kushner, what do you expect?

Actually, they’re not. Kushner went to Harvard.

Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

[Anonymous]

CS and Engineering is the new Ivy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
CS and Engineering is the new Ivy

And generally much less expensive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

If everyone is getting a 3.7 GPA or higher, it will make the vetting process by employers much harder.

This is NOT how it works in the real world. In my software engineering group of twenty, two people will get a rating of 4 (exceptional), three people will get a rating of 3 (outstanding), ten people will get a rating of two (successful), and five people will get a rating of 1 (below average). Why can't they do the same in college? Where I work, they will pick a recent grad with a 2.5 GPA but with AWS certification(s) over a grad with 4.0 GPA but no AWS certification(s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

If everyone is getting a 3.7 GPA or higher, it will make the vetting process by employers much harder.

This is NOT how it works in the real world. In my software engineering group of twenty, two people will get a rating of 4 (exceptional), three people will get a rating of 3 (outstanding), ten people will get a rating of two (successful), and five people will get a rating of 1 (below average). Why can't they do the same in college? Where I work, they will pick a recent grad with a 2.5 GPA but with AWS certification(s) over a grad with 4.0 GPA but no AWS certification(s).

That works for your workplace. My stem workplace will pick a 4.0 gpa from a tough major/school (we check that the coursework was higher level physics and comp sci and math). And we don't curve for annual performance. Your performance is what it is, and some years its all 3s and we give people big raises because everyone knocked it out and made our company successful. Id rather not hire the 1s in the first place and have to replace and train new people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

If everyone is getting a 3.7 GPA or higher, it will make the vetting process by employers much harder.

This is NOT how it works in the real world. In my software engineering group of twenty, two people will get a rating of 4 (exceptional), three people will get a rating of 3 (outstanding), ten people will get a rating of two (successful), and five people will get a rating of 1 (below average). Why can't they do the same in college? Where I work, they will pick a recent grad with a 2.5 GPA but with AWS certification(s) over a grad with 4.0 GPA but no AWS certification(s).

But what if a particular cohort of employees is truly exceptional? What if more than two people deserve a 4? What if no one deserves a 4 that year? What if you’ve managed to put together an amazing team, as every employer hopes to do, and you genuinely want to keep them all. You’ll still give five 1s? How would that be in the company’s interest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

If everyone is getting a 3.7 GPA or higher, it will make the vetting process by employers much harder.

This is NOT how it works in the real world. In my software engineering group of twenty, two people will get a rating of 4 (exceptional), three people will get a rating of 3 (outstanding), ten people will get a rating of two (successful), and five people will get a rating of 1 (below average). Why can't they do the same in college? Where I work, they will pick a recent grad with a 2.5 GPA but with AWS certification(s) over a grad with 4.0 GPA but no AWS certification(s).

That works for your workplace. My stem workplace will pick a 4.0 gpa from a tough major/school (we check that the coursework was higher level physics and comp sci and math). And we don't curve for annual performance. Your performance is what it is, and some years its all 3s and we give people big raises because everyone knocked it out and made our company successful. Id rather not hire the 1s in the first place and have to replace and train new people.

Good for you. For most employers and grad schools, the name Yale on the degree is all the vetting that they quality of the course work gets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s try this again: Extremely bright, extremely motivated, extremely achievement-oriented students choose a top school.
They are given tasks and assignments. If all of them do what they are asked to do, then all of them get As — as they should.

It really doesn’t make sense to continually post threads questioning why students who were picked because they are excellent students earning top grades continue to be excellent students earning top grades while they are in college. Education doesn’t require artificially creating a zero sum game. Education requires mastery.

If everyone is getting a 3.7 GPA or higher, it will make the vetting process by employers much harder.

This is NOT how it works in the real world. In my software engineering group of twenty, two people will get a rating of 4 (exceptional), three people will get a rating of 3 (outstanding), ten people will get a rating of two (successful), and five people will get a rating of 1 (below average). Why can't they do the same in college? Where I work, they will pick a recent grad with a 2.5 GPA but with AWS certification(s) over a grad with 4.0 GPA but no AWS certification(s).

That works for your workplace. My stem workplace will pick a 4.0 gpa from a tough major/school (we check that the coursework was higher level physics and comp sci and math). And we don't curve for annual performance. Your performance is what it is, and some years its all 3s and we give people big raises because everyone knocked it out and made our company successful. Id rather not hire the 1s in the first place and have to replace and train new people.

DP. Those folks who get 1s could be superstars somewhere else just not my current employer, not when they get paid 230K salary starting salary after graduation. The highest salary I've seen for a recently hired grad at this place was around 330K and he is one of those that received a "4" rating and 75K bonus on top of that.