I feel like curving the grades is just unfair, not transparent and goes against what learning is about. It also adds extra stress on the students. Having a grading scale of let's say:




... etc.

It allows the students to know where they stand. They got 40/40 for an assignment, their goal is to get a B, they know that they need to aim for 41/60 on the final exam. They are not in the dark, they know where they stand, how to spread their workload based on their target GPA and not stress more than necessary.

Also there are cases when a given class is just better than the previous year. Let's say the average of a class is 70% in one year, and 85% for next years class. So why should a person who gets 85% get the same grade as someone who got 70%? (Assuming normal distribution for both classes). Just because he placed the same relative to his year? But then when both will enter the job market, the person with 85% will have a better understanding of the subject, they ARE better, so they deserve a better grade.

Professors can always make their exams harder to achieve the curve they want, that's true, but it's still more transparent. I had some hard classes in my uni where rumours had it that on average 40% of the class fails. The my class had a fail rate of only around 10%. Seems like people on average worked harder than the other years, so more people passed, this is FAIR.

I think I covered most points of why curving grades is unfair and not student friendly, it goes against the point of our education system. The goal is to TEACH and to LEARN, not to make students compete against each other because the worst x% always fails.

If there is any point I missed or overlooked I would be open to hear opinions out and debate the topic.



Browse other questions tagged .