Okay, the topic at hand is, you guessed it, the weighted GPA. I'll try to be as coherent as possible, but my own thoughts are a little disorganized on the subject.
For those unfamiliar with the weighted GPA system, here's how it works at my school and at many other places:
1. Usually, grading is based off a 1 to 4 scale. 4 is an A, 3 is a B, etc.
2. In a weighted class, a 5 is an A, 4 is a B, etc.
I have just received my report card last Friday and saw my GPA, which was at a 4.66 for the semester. For those not aware, take your total points from your grades and divide by the credits (in my case, 28/6).
Naturally, I was pretty happy, at least until I went on facebook. With report cards just coming in the mail for the majority of students, there was a lot of GPA sharing going around. I've kept a small list of people's GPA's I've gotten over facebook as a sort of mini study. I then arranged them from high to low. There's some slight data problems because some people told me one decimal while others told me two.
4.66
4.66
4.66
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.33
4
4
4
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.4
3.1 (Not entirely sure on validity)
2.83
2.8
2.1
2.1
And a sloppily made Excel graph for your convenience
A few quick flaws in the data:
1. Way too small a sample size
2. No way of verifying data
3. Not a random sample. Based off of my friends, many of whom are from my classes and are most likely better students because of those classes.
4. This is a suburban upper middle class high school, and C's sometimes don't reflect the "average". I find that an unweighted B fulfills that role.
I'm going to assume from a very amateur statistics viewpoint that this should look something like a standard bell curve. It has a resemblance to one, but it seems to be tilted towards the upper half. What draws more attention is the fact that there are so many 4+ GPA's.
Well sonny, back in my day, the best students got 4's, and everyone else didn't. Well, now it looks as if anyone can get a 4 with a few weighted classes and much less elbow grease than it used to take. The result is undeniably grade inflation, where everyone is smart and no one is smart.
As a junior in high school, I've had to pay attention to the college application process. Colleges for the most part seem to have realized that the weighted scale has unnecessarily inflated grades. As a result, many colleges look at the unweighted grade.
A 4.85 (assuming that Physical Education counts on a 4.0 scale) is the new 4.0. The system tried to create a way to get the better academic students recognized and instead just assigned them a new number.
So, on the basis of needless inflation of grades, I say that the weighted grade system should be done away with. I see no point in assigning a higher number to the GPA system that often does not get used and potentially allows less work to be done in an honors class than a regular class for the same GPA.
Your thoughts? Need clarification on any points? I'd love to hear what you think.
For those unfamiliar with the weighted GPA system, here's how it works at my school and at many other places:
1. Usually, grading is based off a 1 to 4 scale. 4 is an A, 3 is a B, etc.
2. In a weighted class, a 5 is an A, 4 is a B, etc.
I have just received my report card last Friday and saw my GPA, which was at a 4.66 for the semester. For those not aware, take your total points from your grades and divide by the credits (in my case, 28/6).
Naturally, I was pretty happy, at least until I went on facebook. With report cards just coming in the mail for the majority of students, there was a lot of GPA sharing going around. I've kept a small list of people's GPA's I've gotten over facebook as a sort of mini study. I then arranged them from high to low. There's some slight data problems because some people told me one decimal while others told me two.
4.66
4.66
4.66
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.33
4
4
4
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.4
3.1 (Not entirely sure on validity)
2.83
2.8
2.1
2.1
And a sloppily made Excel graph for your convenience
A few quick flaws in the data:
1. Way too small a sample size
2. No way of verifying data
3. Not a random sample. Based off of my friends, many of whom are from my classes and are most likely better students because of those classes.
4. This is a suburban upper middle class high school, and C's sometimes don't reflect the "average". I find that an unweighted B fulfills that role.
I'm going to assume from a very amateur statistics viewpoint that this should look something like a standard bell curve. It has a resemblance to one, but it seems to be tilted towards the upper half. What draws more attention is the fact that there are so many 4+ GPA's.
Well sonny, back in my day, the best students got 4's, and everyone else didn't. Well, now it looks as if anyone can get a 4 with a few weighted classes and much less elbow grease than it used to take. The result is undeniably grade inflation, where everyone is smart and no one is smart.
As a junior in high school, I've had to pay attention to the college application process. Colleges for the most part seem to have realized that the weighted scale has unnecessarily inflated grades. As a result, many colleges look at the unweighted grade.
A 4.85 (assuming that Physical Education counts on a 4.0 scale) is the new 4.0. The system tried to create a way to get the better academic students recognized and instead just assigned them a new number.
So, on the basis of needless inflation of grades, I say that the weighted grade system should be done away with. I see no point in assigning a higher number to the GPA system that often does not get used and potentially allows less work to be done in an honors class than a regular class for the same GPA.
Your thoughts? Need clarification on any points? I'd love to hear what you think.