Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
It really is unfair for science students.
In my Bio classes the average was B-. In my arts electives it was b+. Getting a B+ in science meant you had to be in the top part of a very competitive class. A b+ in arts just meant showing up and handing in all the assignments. It blew my mind that people in arts classes would just not hand in assignments worth 5-20% of their mark and still be allowed to remain in school.
I have no problem with how tough science was, but they should make arts equally as tough. Especially if schools like Law, which both science and arts students apply, are going to blindly look at marks.
|
Disparities in marking between different universities is what used to bug me when I was getting close to graduating, much more than how easy arts were compared to science. In a lot of my classes, no one would get an 'A' - they reserved that for someone who truly stood out from the pack. Then when I was applying for grad school, a lot of universities made it clear they'd only look at people with a straight A average or close to it - which no one in my program at U of C got. I later took graduate classes at 3 other universities, and at all of them getting A's was pretty easy (I don't know how much of that was a function of different grading at the graduate vs. undergraduate level and how much from different university policies though). At least US universities put some weight on GRE scores; there isn't really anything equivalent here for most programs.