s/o Do you think your DC's grades are well-earned or inflated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Keep asking, no one answers:

Assuming this is true, where is the evidence this is causing problems, and for whom? Don't want speculation, want evidence.

It doesn’t cause problems. There are just some people with a weird and nasty mindset and character defects in this world who think this way because of their rampant insecurities.

[Anonymous]

I think DD's grades are appropriate. She definitely does a ton of work in hard classes but also struggles with executive function (has inattentive ADHD) and because of late work or missed elements has ended up with anything from a D to an A in individual quarters. Junior year she'd do great in one class while flailing in another, switch focus and have the grades swap the next quarter. But, in the end averaged out to half As and half Bs, which seemed about right. The only inflation I saw was in her calculus grade, which really should have rounded to a final C+ but she had done a lot better in the last quarter of the year and I think her teacher could see that she was working really hard on it. So, she gave her some grace and rounded it up to a B (no B- grades at our school).

With more maturity and lessons learned from junior year, senior year is going much better with all As in 1st semester. Makes me feel better about her readiness for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Your zero sum thinking is antiquated and wrong and your “participation trophies” trope points to you not being particularly bright.

The purpose of education is to gain mastery of material. It’s perfectly fine if everyone gets an A if they learn it.

It’s like you think there should be a bell curve where the highest grades are rationed.

No one functions that way anymore. Certainly not employers. And profits are booming.

Of course the goal is for everyone to learn the material. Yes. 100%. But this doesn't mean everyone of those kids is at the same intelligence level, genetically/learned, and able to do the work required at top universities. This is what is meant by that post, but you have trouble with reading comprehension. Fine, give them an A but perhaps put an asterisk by it. My brother's very low grades in high school accurately portrayed him not being emotionally and developmentally ready for college. He is a very naturally bright person, but was not ready for academics and did not thrive in school. He was a late bloomer who finished college later and did well. Today he probably would have graduated with a 4.0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Your zero sum thinking is antiquated and wrong and your “participation trophies” trope points to you not being particularly bright.

The purpose of education is to gain mastery of material. It’s perfectly fine if everyone gets an A if they learn it.

It’s like you think there should be a bell curve where the highest grades are rationed.

No one functions that way anymore. Certainly not employers. And profits are booming.

Of course the goal is for everyone to learn the material. Yes. 100%. But this doesn't mean everyone of those kids is at the same intelligence level, genetically/learned, and able to do the work required at top universities. This is what is meant by that post, but you have trouble with reading comprehension. Fine, give them an A but perhaps put an asterisk by it. My brother's very low grades in high school accurately portrayed him not being emotionally and developmentally ready for college. He is a very naturally bright person, but was not ready for academics and did not thrive in school. He was a late bloomer who finished college later and did well. Today he probably would have graduated with a 4.0.

Two points:

1. Yet again, no evidence that this, if true, is causing any problems
2. You anecdote about your brother perfectly illustrates why it is NOT causing problems as he finished college and did well. So you self-owned there, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Keep asking, no one answers:

Assuming this is true, where is the evidence this is causing problems, and for whom? Don't want speculation, want evidence.

Back when I was in high school the kids with the very high test scores and GPAs were some of the smartest kids in the school. By far. There was a clear separation between the honors kids and the rest of the students. We have erased that and every kid is deemed GT and every kid has a 4.0. I don't think that means they all understand the material in the same way or that they are of the same intelligence level/ability.

It comes down to: how are admissions officers/universities going to pick a class of students? We have basically said grades don't matter and scores don't matter. We are all one. We all have 4.0s and we don't need to show our test scores. And it's why we have 96,000 applicants at some universities this year. Everyone meets the requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Your zero sum thinking is antiquated and wrong and your “participation trophies” trope points to you not being particularly bright.

The purpose of education is to gain mastery of material. It’s perfectly fine if everyone gets an A if they learn it.

It’s like you think there should be a bell curve where the highest grades are rationed.

No one functions that way anymore. Certainly not employers. And profits are booming.

Of course the goal is for everyone to learn the material. Yes. 100%. But this doesn't mean everyone of those kids is at the same intelligence level, genetically/learned, and able to do the work required at top universities. This is what is meant by that post, but you have trouble with reading comprehension. Fine, give them an A but perhaps put an asterisk by it. My brother's very low grades in high school accurately portrayed him not being emotionally and developmentally ready for college. He is a very naturally bright person, but was not ready for academics and did not thrive in school. He was a late bloomer who finished college later and did well. Today he probably would have graduated with a 4.0.

Two points:

1. Yet again, no evidence that this, if true, is causing any problems
2. You anecdote about your brother perfectly illustrates why it is NOT causing problems as he finished college and did well. So you self-owned there, sorry.

Nope. It took him 10 years to earn a BS and it was not from a school in the top 100. If he had all As and no test scores (which is very doable today--mom and dad could have done his work, teachers could have let him try, try and try again)--he very well could have taken the place of a student at a top 20 who was prepared because he had a helluva lot of ECs and was top-ranked nationally in his sport. But, guess what? Many schools could not bend the academic rules for his admission with his required test scores and low gpa. That wouldn't have been an issue today.

[Anonymous]

Standard based learnings coming to our local public high schools very soon is going to eliminate gpas too. So now we have no test scores and no gpas--just a 'meets or exceeds expectations'. Oh boy. Good luck with that admissions' officers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Your zero sum thinking is antiquated and wrong and your “participation trophies” trope points to you not being particularly bright.

The purpose of education is to gain mastery of material. It’s perfectly fine if everyone gets an A if they learn it.

It’s like you think there should be a bell curve where the highest grades are rationed.

No one functions that way anymore. Certainly not employers. And profits are booming.

Of course the goal is for everyone to learn the material. Yes. 100%. But this doesn't mean everyone of those kids is at the same intelligence level, genetically/learned, and able to do the work required at top universities. This is what is meant by that post, but you have trouble with reading comprehension. Fine, give them an A but perhaps put an asterisk by it. My brother's very low grades in high school accurately portrayed him not being emotionally and developmentally ready for college. He is a very naturally bright person, but was not ready for academics and did not thrive in school. He was a late bloomer who finished college later and did well. Today he probably would have graduated with a 4.0.

Two points:

1. Yet again, no evidence that this, if true, is causing any problems
2. You anecdote about your brother perfectly illustrates why it is NOT causing problems as he finished college and did well. So you self-owned there, sorry.

Nope. It took him 10 years to earn a BS and it was not from a school in the top 100. If he had all As and no test scores (which is very doable today--mom and dad could have done his work, teachers could have let him try, try and try again)--he very well could have taken the place of a student at a top 20 who was prepared because he had a helluva lot of ECs and was top-ranked nationally in his sport. But, guess what? Many schools could not bend the academic rules for his admission with his required test scores and low gpa. That wouldn't have been an issue today.

Lol, no, sorry, your anecdote and speculation fail. Who knows, he might have done better at a top 20 on a team with academic support. You admit he was capable.

[Anonymous]

Hey all you people demanding extremely incremental grades to distinguish qualities in individuals...

...answer this question:

How are you graded at work?

By categories, you say? Usually 3-4?

Wow, why is that? Do companies not care if an employee is 1/50th more "satisfactory" or "exceeds expectations" than another?

Is that because it makes no practical difference?

I wonder why that is!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Your zero sum thinking is antiquated and wrong and your “participation trophies” trope points to you not being particularly bright.

The purpose of education is to gain mastery of material. It’s perfectly fine if everyone gets an A if they learn it.

It’s like you think there should be a bell curve where the highest grades are rationed.

No one functions that way anymore. Certainly not employers. And profits are booming.

Of course the goal is for everyone to learn the material. Yes. 100%. But this doesn't mean everyone of those kids is at the same intelligence level, genetically/learned, and able to do the work required at top universities. This is what is meant by that post, but you have trouble with reading comprehension. Fine, give them an A but perhaps put an asterisk by it. My brother's very low grades in high school accurately portrayed him not being emotionally and developmentally ready for college. He is a very naturally bright person, but was not ready for academics and did not thrive in school. He was a late bloomer who finished college later and did well. Today he probably would have graduated with a 4.0.

Two points:

1. Yet again, no evidence that this, if true, is causing any problems
2. You anecdote about your brother perfectly illustrates why it is NOT causing problems as he finished college and did well. So you self-owned there, sorry.

Nope. It took him 10 years to earn a BS and it was not from a school in the top 100. If he had all As and no test scores (which is very doable today--mom and dad could have done his work, teachers could have let him try, try and try again)--he very well could have taken the place of a student at a top 20 who was prepared because he had a helluva lot of ECs and was top-ranked nationally in his sport. But, guess what? Many schools could not bend the academic rules for his admission with his required test scores and low gpa. That wouldn't have been an issue today.

Lol, no, sorry, your anecdote and speculation fail. Who knows, he might have done better at a top 20 on a team with academic support. You admit he was capable.

He was assigned a tutor and was followed at his college. He didn't even go pick up his 'paid' books that came with the scholarship. The 4 athletic team roommates (not the same sport) didn't even add up to a 4.0 first semester. He transferred out.

He was not capable at 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey all you people demanding extremely incremental grades to distinguish qualities in individuals...

...answer this question:

How are you graded at work?

By categories, you say? Usually 3-4?

Wow, why is that? Do companies not care if an employee is 1/50th more "satisfactory" or "exceeds expectations" than another?

Is that because it makes no practical difference?

I wonder why that is!

We have a production AND quality mid-year and final review at my agency/office. Blind. We are compared by that and you can be fired if you drop below production or have too many quality errors. There is also a financial incentive for higher producers.

There is a lot of attrition the first couple of years for employees that couldn't do the work whether it be low production and/or low quality. There is about a 50% retention rate.

My husband is a consultant. You aren't hired if you do shoddy work or are a low producer.

WTH do you work??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all you people demanding extremely incremental grades to distinguish qualities in individuals...

...answer this question:

How are you graded at work?

By categories, you say? Usually 3-4?

Wow, why is that? Do companies not care if an employee is 1/50th more "satisfactory" or "exceeds expectations" than another?

Is that because it makes no practical difference?

I wonder why that is!

We have a production AND quality mid-year and final review at my agency/office. Blind. We are compared by that and you can be fired if you drop below production or have too many quality errors. There is also a financial incentive for higher producers.

There is a lot of attrition the first couple of years for employees that couldn't do the work whether it be low production and/or low quality. There is about a 50% retention rate.

My husband is a consultant. You aren't hired if you do shoddy work or are a low producer.

WTH do you work??

She’s an admission’s officer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

This is what we have come too: low expectations, everyone gets a trophy.

It's fine if they are mentally challenged and need more time, a slower pace, more bites at the apple. They should not be given the same grade. If the standards are lowered and the bar keeps getting dropped, kids will meet the lowest common denominator. We used to distinguish between kids that were prepared for rigorous college course load at the top 10-20 universities. They aren't kids turning in things late and having trouble studying or retaining material and 3 chapters behind. That is fine. They can attend a university which moves at a slower pace and has more students in the same boat. This is equivalent to putting a mediocre football player at best on Georgia or Michigan's teams.

Not every kid is the same. We started to fail when we want every ability to be the same for every child. At some point we stopped awarding merit due to the poor self esteem it might cause in other students and a prime example of that was the hiding of the NSMF at local area high schools--many of them. And now doing away with test scores...and hell you have some advocating for removal of GPAs as a standard too. These are academic institutions, academic success matters. We have thousands of universities in the country, not everyone is meant for a top 50.

Your zero sum thinking is antiquated and wrong and your “participation trophies” trope points to you not being particularly bright.

The purpose of education is to gain mastery of material. It’s perfectly fine if everyone gets an A if they learn it.

It’s like you think there should be a bell curve where the highest grades are rationed.

No one functions that way anymore. Certainly not employers. And profits are booming.

Of course the goal is for everyone to learn the material. Yes. 100%. But this doesn't mean everyone of those kids is at the same intelligence level, genetically/learned, and able to do the work required at top universities. This is what is meant by that post, but you have trouble with reading comprehension. Fine, give them an A but perhaps put an asterisk by it. My brother's very low grades in high school accurately portrayed him not being emotionally and developmentally ready for college. He is a very naturally bright person, but was not ready for academics and did not thrive in school. He was a late bloomer who finished college later and did well. Today he probably would have graduated with a 4.0.

Two points:

1. Yet again, no evidence that this, if true, is causing any problems
2. You anecdote about your brother perfectly illustrates why it is NOT causing problems as he finished college and did well. So you self-owned there, sorry.

Nope. It took him 10 years to earn a BS and it was not from a school in the top 100. If he had all As and no test scores (which is very doable today--mom and dad could have done his work, teachers could have let him try, try and try again)--he very well could have taken the place of a student at a top 20 who was prepared because he had a helluva lot of ECs and was top-ranked nationally in his sport. But, guess what? Many schools could not bend the academic rules for his admission with his required test scores and low gpa. That wouldn't have been an issue today.

Lol, no, sorry, your anecdote and speculation fail. Who knows, he might have done better at a top 20 on a team with academic support. You admit he was capable.

He was assigned a tutor and was followed at his college. He didn't even go pick up his 'paid' books that came with the scholarship. The 4 athletic team roommates (not the same sport) didn't even add up to a 4.0 first semester. He transferred out.

He was not capable at 18.

But you have no idea if he would have gotten As or not, or if that would have caused a problem for anyone. None. He did poorly at first at the college he went to. Are you saying it would be worse if he did poorly at a college ranked slightly higher? How does that logic work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private HS very well-earned.

They were public in middle school and basically just had to show up. Many of their friends didn't even start assignments until after the due date and took retests all of the time...and could attain the same A.

While not great habits, procrastination is hardly unusual and retakes for an A is fine if they learn the material, which is the point (rather than getting the grade first or whatever).

What schools allow retakes for an A? FCPS puts 80% as the max you could receive on a retake--even if you got 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey all you people demanding extremely incremental grades to distinguish qualities in individuals...

...answer this question:

How are you graded at work?

By categories, you say? Usually 3-4?

Wow, why is that? Do companies not care if an employee is 1/50th more "satisfactory" or "exceeds expectations" than another?

Is that because it makes no practical difference?

I wonder why that is!

We have a production AND quality mid-year and final review at my agency/office. Blind. We are compared by that and you can be fired if you drop below production or have too many quality errors. There is also a financial incentive for higher producers.

There is a lot of attrition the first couple of years for employees that couldn't do the work whether it be low production and/or low quality. There is about a 50% retention rate.

My husband is a consultant. You aren't hired if you do shoddy work or are a low producer.

WTH do you work??

You did not read the post well. The post you reply to explicitly says grades are given at work. But they are not incremental to "rank" employees as those demanding bell curve grades want.

Additionally, the claim in your post supports the alternate position, that there are folks that can do the work, and folks who can't and get fired. Exceptional workers get bonuses. That's three categories. On Commission work is the only one that is rewarded with a bell-curve like gradient.