Comments (6)

why should a student in the 90th percentile be considered equal to a student in the 100th percentile. Would that not be unfair to the better student?
Why should anyone try for 100 if 90 is just as good?

Because you can't be perfect all the time. If you could, then there wouldn't need to be A-'s and the like. Why not just have it 100=Pass, <100=Fail?

I give you a c+ for that line of reasoning.

My point is this: 90 isn't what you're supposed to aim for. You are supposed to shoot for 100 all the time. The only problem is that there is almost no possible way to make a perfect grade all the time. You can read all the material, take all the notes, and do whatever else there is to do, and still not make 100. The reason they put A's between 90 and 100 is to give those students that tried and still couldn't make a perfect score a chance at still getting a good grade. The +/- scale doesn't solve this "problem" of students not shooting for 100's. They just shoot for a 95 instead of a 90.

Also, the +/- scale helps poor students, but hurts good students. If I made a 78, I've made a C+. That won't hurt my GPA as much as if I made a 75. If I made a 98, however, I get an A+. I get a 4.0 for the course. If I make a 95, I get an A, and still make a 4.0 for the course. If I make a 93, I get an A-. That's a 3.96 for the course. It doesn't benefit you AT ALL to make an A+. That's completely unfair.

In the end it is really all meaningless. Very few employers care what your GPA was.

You keep saying "unfair"
Were different rules applied to you?

If not, then it was fair. It's just not what you wanted.

You don't "get" grades, you earn them.
The grade you earned was closer to a B+ than an A+

Be glad that you didn't get lumped in with the idiots that made 89%