Hi everyone,

I guess this is the time when everyone receives their term 1 marks, and I was just troubled by our 12 point conversion to 4.0.

From what I understand, we must convert each mark to x/4.0 first, and sum up the 5 marks, and divide by 5.

For example, for McMaster, a [12 + 11 + 10 + 9 + 9]/ 5 = 10.2, which is above a 3.7.
However, convert to 4.0 GPA, [ 4 + 3.9 + 3.7 + 3.3 + 3.3] /5= 3.64, which is much lower than the expected 3.7.

For course, this matters if one is planning to apply for professional/ graduate studies, but is this conversion not obviously flawed?

Anyone else confused?

Yeah it doesn't work out properly.

If we were given percentiles instead of a range everything would work out easier.

Or we could just use the 4.0 scale, that would work too.

A 10.4 average works out to 4.76, if that helps....

Not to mention how shitty a 10 is, 3.7... bah.

Yeah, a 10.2 average is actually decent, but apparently it's a 3.6 converted. Really? That seems so mediocre...

Originally Posted by Alchemist11

Yeah, a 10.2 average is actually decent, but apparently it's a 3.6 converted. Really? That seems so mediocre...

uhhh

10.2= A-
3.6= A- (In most cases;Google it!)

o_0 ?

Unlike our 12 point system, the 4.0 system places a high premium on staying in the A range over the B range over the C range over the D range. While ours places equal focus on falling from A to A- as A- to B+.

Essentially the 4.0 rewards someone who has all A-'s over someone with a B, B+, A-, A and A+. Both would be 10 averages on the 12 point scale but on is a 3.7 and the other is 3.58 on the 4.0. In other words: Consistency is being counted more than the ability to do great in one class to make up for bad marks in another.

Huzaifa: I did google a 3.6, and it depends on the school, but I believe it is considered either a B+ or A- .

However, the point is, if you received a cumulative average of 10.0 for 5 courses, it is a 3.7 according to McMaster.

Once you convert it, in most situations (unless you get perfect 10, 10, 10, 10, 10), your converted GPA will be <3.7. It will be around a 3.6.

Would you prefer to have a 3.6 or your deserved 3.7? Seems like a small .10 difference, but it does make a big difference when applying to professional schools for example.

It doesn't seem to be fair to lose a 0.10 chunk of your GPA due to how we convert to the "standard 4.0" scale, right?

Originally Posted by dynast

Huzaifa: I did google a 3.6, and it depends on the school, but I believe it is considered either a B+ or A- .

However, the point is, if you received a cumulative average of 10.0 for 5 courses, it is a 3.7 according to McMaster.

Once you convert it, in most situations (unless you get perfect 10, 10, 10, 10, 10), your converted GPA will be <3.7. It will be around a 3.6.

Would you prefer to have a 3.6 or your deserved 3.7? Seems like a small .10 difference, but it does make a big difference when applying to professional schools for example.

It doesn't seem to be fair to lose a 0.10 chunk of your GPA due to how we convert to the "standard 4.0" scale, right?

You didn't loose grades. The 4.0 scale rewards consistency. If your grade does not convert to 3.7 properly you don't deserve a 3.7. The two scales are different and have a different emphasis. An average to average conversion would not be fair to those at schools which use a 4.0 scale, or convert from letter grades.

whats the purpose of the 12 point system anyway? seems like no other schools have it, and we always have to convert to a 4.0 scale anyway. does anyone know why mcmaster changed to the 12 point scale in the first place?

Originally Posted by arathbon

Unlike our 12 point system, the 4.0 system places a high premium on staying in the A range over the B range over the C range over the D range. While ours places equal focus on falling from A to A- as A- to B+.

Essentially the 4.0 rewards someone who has all A-'s over someone with a B, B+, A-, A and A+. Both would be 10 averages on the 12 point scale but on is a 3.7 and the other is 3.58 on the 4.0. In other words: Consistency is being counted more than the ability to do great in one class to make up for bad marks in another.

Exactly! 12.0 has its flaws and I randomly heard that Professional students treat 12.0 University applicants differently.

As Arathbon said, Someone will still get a B in 4.0 system even if it is a 81% B- according to our 12 pt scale or a 88/89% B+. In other words a student with a B- leering on C+ is the same as a B+ who probably deserved a A-

I don't really like the above situation at all!

The 4.0: It causes grade inflation at times(due to a number of factors) which obviously makes people happy!

Originally Posted by dynast

For example, for McMaster, a [12 + 11 + 10 + 9 + 9]/ 5 = 10.2, which is above a 3.7.

This is actually the calculation which is flawed...not the conversion.

Why? Because as Danielle pointed out, each grade represents a range...and not only that, they don't even represent ranges of the same size!

For instance, 9s are 77-79%, 3 values (inclusive). 10s are 80-84%, 11s are 85-90%, both are 5 values (inclusive), and 12s are 90-100%, 11 values (inclusive).

"Averaging" two McMaster grades is rarely accurate...here is the standard example:

Suppose I receive 82% in one course, and 78% in another, both worth 3 units. The average should be [82% + 78%] / 2 = 80%, which is a 10...but converting to the 12 point system yields a 10 and a 9, which average to a 9.5...not a 10!

This exact computation is the reason why Dean's Honour List requires a 9.5 and not a 10 (even though they say "A-").


But let's even use your exact numbers...1x12, 1x11, 1x10, and 2x9.

Suppose your scored 98, 87, 82, 78 and 79 (chosen to prove a point).

Your average would then realistically be [98 + 87 + 83 + 78 + 79] / 5 = 85% which is an 11...but your computation shows, conversion to the 12 point scale and then taking the average gave a 10.2, which is approximately 81%.


Now...note that this 81% is always lower than you deserve. Even if you take the minimum possible scores you could have gotten, 90, 85, 80, 77 and 77, your average would be [90 + 85 + 80 + 77 + 77] / 5 = 81.8% which is more accurately like a 10.36 on the 12 point scale.



But since each 12 pt. GPA corresponds to exactly one 4 pt. GPA value (ie. 12 is 4, 11 is 3.9, 10 is 3.7, etc.) and not a range, as in the 12 point conversion (from percentages) there is no 'extra error' obtained by converting...it's simply a different measure of your scores, designed to acknowledge 'spread' moreso than the overall average.

100 point scale or nothing! imagine?

Arathbon: You're right in your justification of the emphysis on either grade scale.

The 4.0 system does reward consistency, and the 12 system places emphasis between values like 11 versus 10.

However, the point is with conversions of cumulative grade points in a 12 point scale to a 4.0 scale. If we stuck with the standard 4.0 scale, there would be no need for the unnecessary flaws of conversion. A standard is a standard for a reason.

Unlike converting units from different measurement scales, say from pounds to grams, our conversion is subject to differences. There is no pure "equivalent" conversion from a 10 to a X/4.0. It depends on our "consistency" of values averaging to a 10, but at our university, people believe a 10 is a 10, which is a 3.7.

I suppose it will be ignorance that most students will not know of this "issue", until it is too late once near graduation. Nowhere did I find this information out from the university, it was just experimentation. This needs to be ironed out.

Originally Posted by huzaifa47

Exactly! 12.0 has its flaws and I randomly heard that Professional students treat 12.0 University applicants differently.

As Arathbon said, Someone will still get a B in 4.0 system even if it is a 81% B- according to our 12 pt scale or a 88/89% B+. In other words a student with a B- leering on C+ is the same as a B+ who probably deserved a A-

I don't really like the above situation at all!

The 4.0: It causes grade inflation at times(due to a number of factors) which obviously makes people happy!

Not quite what I said.

What I meant was the 4.0 has much bigger gaps between a B+ and an A- than in between grades with the same letter.

D's, C's and B's are based on 1's, 2's and 3's with a plus or minus subtracting or adding .3. This means the gap between a C+ and a B- (D+ and C- or A- and B+) are all .4 which is a bigger gap. As I said the emphasis is on keeping yourself in the general A (+, straight or -) range over dropping to a B (+, straight or -) range.

Lastly it does not reward exceptional performance as well. An A is only a .2 improvement over an A- and an A+ is only .1 over an A. If you know you have to use the 4.0 system for applications, focus more on getting your B+'s into A-'s over getting your A's into A+'s. The 4.0 is rewarding very specific things and if you want a high 4.0 GPA you have to do what it rewards.

Originally Posted by dynast

Arathbon: You're right in your justification of the emphysis on either grade scale.

The 4.0 system does reward consistency, and the 12 system places emphasis between values like 11 versus 10.

However, the point is with conversions of cumulative grade points in a 12 point scale to a 4.0 scale. If we stuck with the standard 4.0 scale, there would be no need for the unnecessary flaws of conversion. A standard is a standard for a reason.

Unlike converting units from different measurement scales, say from pounds to grams, our conversion is subject to differences. There is no pure "equivalent" conversion from a 10 to a X/4.0. It depends on our "consistency" of values averaging to a 10, but at our university, people believe a 10 is a 10, which is a 3.7.

I suppose it will be ignorance that most students will not know of this "issue", until it is too late once near graduation. Nowhere did I find this information out from the university, it was just experimentation. This needs to be ironed out.

Yes I think ignorance is the issue. That's why I try and think of my grades in their letter terms and convert to 4.0 when thinking about med school and 12 point when i'm thinking about internal mcmaster things.