This post is about the 12 point grading system that McMaster has (one of the only schools that does) and why it's a highly flawed system of scoring everyone's GPA.

Usually schools give you percent grades and average out the grades which makes sense, but with the 12 point scale, in one simple average that computers do, people's GPA’s can drop upwards of ten percent. There is never a case where the student gets higher or even the same as what they deserve, it is always substantially lower.

Let me give you an example. Let's say in all four years I get 39 courses with a grade of 12 and one course with a grade of 11. You would think that my average would obviously be in the high nineties. But if we do what McMaster does, averages out the numbers 12, 12, 12, ..., 12, 11 it turns out to be 11.9, which is an 89 percent. So I could get 100 percent in 39 courses and 89 percent in one course and my average would be 89. About ten percent less than it would be if we had just averaged out the percentages alone. It is nearly impossible to get a GPA of 4.0 because that would mean every single course on your transcript has to be a 12. A single 11 would drop your average by ten percent.

If you average out your own grades and then compare it to the point average at the bottom of your transcript you'll also see that your mark has been dropped by at least a couple percent. My mark has been underestimated by 6 percent and that’s assuming that I got the lowest percent in each point bracket. Since we don’t know our percent, but we do know the range, try it both ways. Average out the highest percentage you could have gotten and the lowest percentage you could have gotten (ex. a 9 and a 10 could be either 79% and 84% or 77% and 80%). In either case, that average will be higher than the one your transcript says. There is no mathematical way for McMaster to ever give you a GPA of what you actually got or higher, it is always significantly lower.

Another simpler example: if in two courses I get 78 percent and 82 percent, you would think that my average would be 80. It makes sense on a numerical level. Let’s convert that to points- 9 and 10. The average of the two points is 9.5, which is not an 80 percent; it is actually around a 78 percent. So according to McMaster, the average of 78 and 80 is 78. This point system essentially ‘screws you over’ as you don’t get the marks that you deserve and when applying to a higher level education you are competing with students from universities that give them proper representations of their marks.

At first, when I figured this out I thought maybe there was something I was missing- so I went to the registrar’s office looking for answers. I came out of there leaving them confused. All they said was “we don’t know what happens, we just get the grades from the faculties and put it in the computer and they churn out this number”. So after all the hard work done by professors and students around Mac to get their marks the highest it can be, their cumulative average is “churned out” by a computer that no one at registrar seems to understand and in turn is underestimated. They assume that any average is a fair average, and that averaging out a bunch of points with different weights (i.e. points 1-9 have a range of 3-4% while a 12 has a range of 10%) gives everyone a proper GPA. This is a very flawed way of taking someone’s average and is unfair to every registered student at McMaster.

I am going to the MSU to represent me on this and see if there is anything that could be done. It will not be difficult to change because the faculties are responsible for giving the grades to registrar (in the form of grade letters A+, A, B, etc.). To change that to percentages would be simple as professors would just have to calculate marks in more detail. Once these marks are sent to registrar, the computer would be able to average out the grades the way it does points and give everyone a proper representation of their GPA. It is neither the registrar’s nor the faculties’ faults but the fault of miscommunication between the two. I have gone to both the faculty offices and the registrar office and neither of them know anything about it and both directed me to the other office. Because of this simple mix-up, every single student at McMaster pays dearly.

For a GPA conversion visit http://careers.mcmaster.ca/students/education-planning/virtual-resources/gpa-conversion-chart You'll notice that McMaster is one of the only school's that has a 12 point scale and that most universites use percent grades.

Please spread the word about this. Post it on your profile and message friends. If you have any questions or if you still don't quite get it, feel free to contact me.


http://www.facebook.com/note.php?not...20093 &ref=mf

[/quote]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure if anyone of you is among the mutual friend list chain of this guy, but this note posted on facebook today is bothering me like hell. I solved the first concern I think: "Hasheel, your theory adds up if I rack up numbers on my calculator using your method. However I do remember clearly reading on Macinsiders(A post by a senior student) that we should ALWAYS first convert our individual grade to the 4.0 and then take out the /4.0 average. In that case it would be 39*4.0+ 3.9/ 40= 3.9975
At this point I'm assuming that they would obviously round of to 4.0
As for the averaging problem criteria, I'll ponder over that for a bit. But do contact VPED and if that fails OMBUDS for a resoultion, I won't be surprised if there is a more knowledgeable grading officer somewhere in the bowels of Gilmour Hall who might know something :S"

But I have NOO idea about the rest, having been given Credit for all the calculus I ever need for my Econ degree via Highschool and being out of touch since then. Since I obviously don't have that guys permission to post it on the main page and get a more educated response, by some random shot does someone here knows the solution to the averaging problem?

p.s: I do have the permission of the individual who posted the note on Facebook(link attached)

Haha. That was on my minifeed too.

However I do remember clearly reading on Macinsiders(A post by a senior student) that we should ALWAYS first convert our individual grade to the 4.0 and then take out the /4.0 average. In that case it would be 39*4.0+ 3.9/ 40= 3.9975

This is correct.

I say do away with the 12-point system and stick to percentages. The fact that we have to convert to 4.0 to get our real mark defeats the purpose of having the 12. Besides, having only 12 values to designate grades to students with very very different marks is a little weird.

It's the same thing for the 4.0 system. But the 12 point system is more linear than the 4.0 system.

The 12 point system has an R-value of .9862 (taking into account the average of the range)

The 4.0 point system has an R-value of .9652 (Also taking into account the average of the range)

So technically the 12 point system is a much fairer system than the 4.0 system, which is why when you convert you lose percentages. It's because the 4.0 system isn't as accurate at the 12 point system.

But yes, in order to get a completely accurate result, it would be best to use averages. But the reason why they don't use percentages as the default system is because every university marks differently and thus a range is a lot more fair towards students when it comes to looking at academic success.

Originally Posted by jhan523

But yes, in order to get a completely accurate result, it would be best to use averages. But the reason why don't don't use average as the default system is because every university marks differently and thus a range is a lot more fair towards students when it comes to looking at academic success.

I understood the first part of your post, but this second one I have NO IDEA, can you pleaaasee layman-ify it?

Also Is he right here?

"If you average out your own grades and then compare it to the point average at the bottom of your transcript you'll also see that your mark has been dropped by at least a couple percent. My mark has been underestimated by 6 percent and that’s assuming that I got the lowest percent in each point bracket. Since we don’t know our percent, but we do know the range, try it both ways. Average out the highest percentage you could have gotten and the lowest percentage you could have gotten (ex. a 9 and a 10 could be either 79% and 84% or 77% and 80%). In either case, that average will be higher than the one your transcript says. There is no mathematical way for McMaster to ever give you a GPA of what you actually got or higher, it is always significantly lower."

Edit:Wait I think I get one inkling of your post, You feel that the correct and most common sense thing should be that 78+82=80 but for some reason they choose 78? :S

Sorry, I had some typos, re-read it now please ^-^

Yeah, I haven't heard of any cases where the conversion got a higher range than what you originally started with... but then again my research pool is very low (only between my friends). So I can't say for certain. Although my average in both systems are pretty close together, 9.6 and 3.49 (it should be slightly higher than 3.5). Kind of disappointing, but the error isn't McMaster's fault. They have a more linear point system than the 4.0 system. So really the 4.0 system is at fault. Atleast that's what I think.

I don't really know what the person was doing...

I was just analyzing the linearity of the point systems. The more linear it is the more accurate it will be because when you average your marks each mark is waited equally.

If there was a curve in the graph then your average will be skewed. For instance, if at the end of the curve, it curves downwards then higher marks will be weighed less than lower marks. If it curves upwards then higher marks will be weighed more than lower marks. That's what I think anyways... My mind is currently exploding will analyzing things during the summer Lol. Not quite sure if I'm correct so it would be nice if someone could confirm my way of thinking.

I think the lower 4.0 is due to the large gap between 10s & 11s (3.7 --> 3.9).

Bell-curving is just to make the grades of the class fall under a certain curve, which looks like a bell!

It's just a certain percentage of the grades should fall withing a certain deviation of the average. The further you get away from the average the less grades there should be in those areas. So basically you have very little very very low marks and very little very very high marks and as you get closer to the average the more grades should fall under the curve.

That is correct jesus, when I graphed the linearity the slope decreases at the top.

Alrighty, but another argument against using the Average system if we use 78+82=80 is that in a sense we are taking a mean of the Data; why does the university think that that is unfair/incorrect methodology?

If the university were to give out percentages instead, your average would be very accurate. However, like I said before, not all universities mark the same way. So when you apply to grad school it's unfair for a some people. That is the reason why I think we use point systems that use a range of percentages instead of the actual percentage.

Sorry, I was away from my computer today, otherwise I would have been more active in this discussion.

First off, GPA conversion is inherently flawed like this. In order to get a 4.0/12.0 you need to 4.0/12.0 ALL your classes, as has been previously stated. Yeah, this really sucks. Having 39 12s and one 11, really sucks in terms of your GPA still not being 4.0.

That being said; This is what a GPA is supposed to measure. The system is intended to not give a 4.0 unless the student is "perfect". 4.0/12.0 is a designation of perfection, and 39 12s and one 11 is not "perfect. Sure it's unbelievably close, but it's not "perfect".

So yea, it does suck that a smart kid will probably end up with an 11.95 at best, but at least this happens to everyone, and not just kids @ Mac.

So Greg, What happens to the Kid who gets a 11.95; It shows up as 11.95 on his Mac transcript. But obviously when he applies elsewhere and uses the Mac translation chart, it would end up as 3.9975(assuming we are still talking about 40 courses scenario), hence what would the grad school see it as? 3.9975=4.0 or just 11.95?

Originally Posted by huzaifa47

So Greg, What happens to the Kid who gets a 11.95; It shows up as 11.95 on his Mac transcript. But obviously when he applies elsewhere and uses the Mac translation chart, it would end up as 3.9975(assuming we are still talking about 40 courses scenario), hence what would the grad school see it as? 3.9975=4.0 or just 11.95?

Well the quick answer is that they would see it as 3.9975 which rounds to 4.0. So there is no prejudice against a 12.0 scale; It converts fairly into a 4.0 scale and you get your score. But to be more specific, McMaster rounds to 1 decimal place, so TECHNICALLY it would show on your transcript as a 12.0 average (11.95 rounds up).

But as far as grad schools are concerned, you'd have a "virtual 4.0".