Anonymous wrote:Grad school admission teams know what schools grade inflate and can usually separate out the posers.

Employers now routinely do their own screening and testing to weed out the truly talented students from those just handed As.

What do you expect when you have individuals rising to the presidency of Stanford and Harvard on plagiarized work or research with faulty data.

Let’s get back to a C is average, a B is above average and an A is outstanding.

Anonymous wrote:This is reflective of the current state of US education, and Harvard is not immune. Columbia professors have been complaining for years. High school curriculum has abandoned facts/content in favor of ideology. Required reading is minimized. Assessments are light and filled with post self reflection rather than expectations of mastery of the material. Test retakes are the norm, even in advanced AP classes!. Kids now read articles and passages vs full books. It's ridiculous. Science/math are less problematic but humanities and social sciences are a big issue. US kids may have high grades/test scores, but that doesn't mean they are smart or well educated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

I agree that this generation has been harmed by factors outside academic policies, but we are witnessing a breakdown caused by a confluence of several events. COVID gave the impetus for test optional policies that were already being pushed for DEI purposes, and combined with COVID school shutdowns, which exacerbated grade inflation at the high school level (also DEI), we ended up with very little way to distinguish which students have had their attention spans completely rotted by social media and which (like your teen, God willing) have not. Academia seems to have reacted to this by lowering academic standards for everyone. Your argument is that this was all inevitable and unavoidable. I disagree — it was not inevitable that elite universities admit less qualified students. In fact, most schools have rescinded their test optional policies, indicating the failure of that experiment, whether they explicitly say so or not. But those policies were always a *choice,* and one that was criticized by many at the time. Universities have the ability to make distinctions between high schools that have rigorous grading policies and those that do not. Or simply demand that students live up to the standards of the university or leave. But that would lead to politically incorrect results, so they water down academic standards for everyone instead. It’s “too hard” to try to lift up those who need assistance, so we drag down the excellent students, instead. This is clearly a net negative for society and the academic reputation of these institutions. It sounds like there are at least some at Harvard that have not resigned themselves to the idea that this is all inevitable and would like to fight back. I wish them luck.

I feel like you’re too wrapped up into the politics of these institutions rather than considering that these institutions know their students are entering wanting a job, wanting fellowships, or wanting a grad school offer by the time they leave. Faculty members were also burned out and got lazy during and post pandemic, but for some reason, that’s not brought up. Most colleges see no benefit reducing their students’ post grad opportunities to filth to win the culture war.

Eventually the reputation of schools that have lowered standards will take a hit, and a degree will no longer be a valuable signal in the labor or grad school market.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shift needs to start in HS - there should be more of a curve. It’s ridiculous how a B has become shameful and an average C score a failure. Most A students are closer to average in ability and intellect … that’s the problem.

100%%%%%%. That’s why colleges now inflate….they get grade inflated HS kids

+1

High schools inflate, which makes good students indistinguishable from great students. If everyone has straight As and all the SAT scores have gone up (because the scoring went up overall and because more and more people take prep courses, the only way for schools to distinguish among these perfect students is through activities--which we all know can be faked.

High schools (public high schools especially) also allow kids to get away with being absolute CRAP writers because no one teaches writing in elementary or middle school and, seeing students with no foundation, high schools give up.

Also, also, to protect from cheating and AI, many high school largely focus on work produced IN CLASS, which means that students are rarely asked to make a sustained effort outside of class. Homework has become so much less relevant than it used to be and this is TERRIBLE. Homework is how students practiced discipline and sustained effort.

This story is not exclusive to Harvard, it is happening everywhere. It is good that Harvard is identifying it.

I agree AI is a problem, but policing for AI doesn’t prevent professors from assigning reading to their students and then testing them on the knowledge retained in class. I believe it was Columbia recently who also publicly discussed the inability of students to read the large volume of complex material that used to be commonplace for college students. There are Ivy League students who aren’t capable of reading novels and can only be spoon fed short excerpts of material. It’s because they’ve never done it before — the high schools have failed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

I agree that this generation has been harmed by factors outside academic policies, but we are witnessing a breakdown caused by a confluence of several events. COVID gave the impetus for test optional policies that were already being pushed for DEI purposes, and combined with COVID school shutdowns, which exacerbated grade inflation at the high school level (also DEI), we ended up with very little way to distinguish which students have had their attention spans completely rotted by social media and which (like your teen, God willing) have not. Academia seems to have reacted to this by lowering academic standards for everyone. Your argument is that this was all inevitable and unavoidable. I disagree — it was not inevitable that elite universities admit less qualified students. In fact, most schools have rescinded their test optional policies, indicating the failure of that experiment, whether they explicitly say so or not. But those policies were always a *choice,* and one that was criticized by many at the time. Universities have the ability to make distinctions between high schools that have rigorous grading policies and those that do not. Or simply demand that students live up to the standards of the university or leave. But that would lead to politically incorrect results, so they water down academic standards for everyone instead. It’s “too hard” to try to lift up those who need assistance, so we drag down the excellent students, instead. This is clearly a net negative for society and the academic reputation of these institutions. It sounds like there are at least some at Harvard that have not resigned themselves to the idea that this is all inevitable and would like to fight back. I wish them luck.

I feel like you’re too wrapped up into the politics of these institutions rather than considering that these institutions know their students are entering wanting a job, wanting fellowships, or wanting a grad school offer by the time they leave. Faculty members were also burned out and got lazy during and post pandemic, but for some reason, that’s not brought up. Most colleges see no benefit reducing their students’ post grad opportunities to filth to win the culture war.

Eventually the reputation of schools that have lowered standards will take a hit, and a degree will no longer be a valuable signal in the labor or grad school market.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

I agree that this generation has been harmed by factors outside academic policies, but we are witnessing a breakdown caused by a confluence of several events. COVID gave the impetus for test optional policies that were already being pushed for DEI purposes, and combined with COVID school shutdowns, which exacerbated grade inflation at the high school level (also DEI), we ended up with very little way to distinguish which students have had their attention spans completely rotted by social media and which (like your teen, God willing) have not. Academia seems to have reacted to this by lowering academic standards for everyone. Your argument is that this was all inevitable and unavoidable. I disagree — it was not inevitable that elite universities admit less qualified students. In fact, most schools have rescinded their test optional policies, indicating the failure of that experiment, whether they explicitly say so or not. But those policies were always a *choice,* and one that was criticized by many at the time. Universities have the ability to make distinctions between high schools that have rigorous grading policies and those that do not. Or simply demand that students live up to the standards of the university or leave. But that would lead to politically incorrect results, so they water down academic standards for everyone instead. It’s “too hard” to try to lift up those who need assistance, so we drag down the excellent students, instead. This is clearly a net negative for society and the academic reputation of these institutions. It sounds like there are at least some at Harvard that have not resigned themselves to the idea that this is all inevitable and would like to fight back. I wish them luck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

I agree that this generation has been harmed by factors outside academic policies, but we are witnessing a breakdown caused by a confluence of several events. COVID gave the impetus for test optional policies that were already being pushed for DEI purposes, and combined with COVID school shutdowns, which exacerbated grade inflation at the high school level (also DEI), we ended up with very little way to distinguish which students have had their attention spans completely rotted by social media and which (like your teen, God willing) have not. Academia seems to have reacted to this by lowering academic standards for everyone. Your argument is that this was all inevitable and unavoidable. I disagree — it was not inevitable that elite universities admit less qualified students. In fact, most schools have rescinded their test optional policies, indicating the failure of that experiment, whether they explicitly say so or not. But those policies were always a *choice,* and one that was criticized by many at the time. Universities have the ability to make distinctions between high schools that have rigorous grading policies and those that do not. Or simply demand that students live up to the standards of the university or leave. But that would lead to politically incorrect results, so they water down academic standards for everyone instead. It’s “too hard” to try to lift up those who need assistance, so we drag down the excellent students, instead. This is clearly a net negative for society and the academic reputation of these institutions. It sounds like there are at least some at Harvard that have not resigned themselves to the idea that this is all inevitable and would like to fight back. I wish them luck.

I feel like you’re too wrapped up into the politics of these institutions rather than considering that these institutions know their students are entering wanting a job, wanting fellowships, or wanting a grad school offer by the time they leave. Faculty members were also burned out and got lazy during and post pandemic, but for some reason, that’s not brought up. Most colleges see no benefit reducing their students’ post grad opportunities to filth to win the culture war.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

I agree that this generation has been harmed by factors outside academic policies, but we are witnessing a breakdown caused by a confluence of several events. COVID gave the impetus for test optional policies that were already being pushed for DEI purposes, and combined with COVID school shutdowns, which exacerbated grade inflation at the high school level (also DEI), we ended up with very little way to distinguish which students have had their attention spans completely rotted by social media and which (like your teen, God willing) have not. Academia seems to have reacted to this by lowering academic standards for everyone. Your argument is that this was all inevitable and unavoidable. I disagree — it was not inevitable that elite universities admit less qualified students. In fact, most schools have rescinded their test optional policies, indicating the failure of that experiment, whether they explicitly say so or not. But those policies were always a *choice,* and one that was criticized by many at the time. Universities have the ability to make distinctions between high schools that have rigorous grading policies and those that do not. Or simply demand that students live up to the standards of the university or leave. But that would lead to politically incorrect results, so they water down academic standards for everyone instead. It’s “too hard” to try to lift up those who need assistance, so we drag down the excellent students, instead. This is clearly a net negative for society and the academic reputation of these institutions. It sounds like there are at least some at Harvard that have not resigned themselves to the idea that this is all inevitable and would like to fight back. I wish them luck.

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fair to say that the average Harvard student is smarter than the average student.

And I think it's fair to say that Organic Chemistry or Econ 101 etc are classes that should be covering the same material more or less no matter the university you are in.

So it makes sense to me that way more Harvard students are getting As in that class than average. I think most Harvard kids should be getting As to be honest.

Now this idea that kids are coming into Harvard unprepared is just a slam on their admissions office full stop. that's a failure.

The average GPA at Harvard has risen dramatically in the last 20 years. Are you arguing that today’s Harvard students are that much smarter than they were 20 years ago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach STEM at one of the notoriously hard universities mentioned in this thread, and I can confidently say that Harvard's struggles with underprepared students are not only Harvard's struggles. Rather, this has affected all universities and all of my colleagues universally feel the struggle. As a result, we have had to redesign our courses, and we have become more lenient, whether that is a philosophy we want to adopt or not. Mostly, we feel it is our responsibility to help students succeed as best we can, and if that means changing previously difficult content to make it more manageable to the majority of the class, that is what we have to do.

And before the people of DCUM jump to the conclusion that this watering down is all due to DEI, or URM, or FGLI, I have faced similar struggles with students who are advantaged in every way and who come in with glowing grades, awards, and national merit recognitions, etc. I honestly believe that some factor has hurt attention spans almost universally among our young people. As the parent of a high schooler, what I observe among my college students has influenced the way I parent, and I am really invested in reducing distractions, and encouraging my teen to take on challenges that involve deep work and which do not guarantee success.

Yes this is not a H specific issue.

Today’s kids have smart phones and AIs. They don’t read as the past generations do.

Grades have increased over the past decades everywhere.

Yes today’s students are more competitive and hard working than their parents. And more international students contributed to the rising quality of students. So, grades are higher even without the inflation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shift needs to start in HS - there should be more of a curve. It’s ridiculous how a B has become shameful and an average C score a failure. Most A students are closer to average in ability and intellect … that’s the problem.

100%%%%%%. That’s why colleges now inflate….they get grade inflated HS kids

+1

High schools inflate, which makes good students indistinguishable from great students. If everyone has straight As and all the SAT scores have gone up (because the scoring went up overall and because more and more people take prep courses, the only way for schools to distinguish among these perfect students is through activities--which we all know can be faked.

High schools (public high schools especially) also allow kids to get away with being absolute CRAP writers because no one teaches writing in elementary or middle school and, seeing students with no foundation, high schools give up.

Also, also, to protect from cheating and AI, many high school largely focus on work produced IN CLASS, which means that students are rarely asked to make a sustained effort outside of class. Homework has become so much less relevant than it used to be and this is TERRIBLE. Homework is how students practiced discipline and sustained effort.

This story is not exclusive to Harvard, it is happening everywhere. It is good that Harvard is identifying it.