I'm not sure people here understand what "bell curving" is... you don't automatically get a higher mark if the grades are actually transformed (or 'bell curved').

More often than not in Canada, the grades in classes are not "bell curved"... usually if a professor modifies the grades it's by making the denominator smaller (ie making the final grade out of of a smaller number). This would make everyone's mark a little bit better.

True "bell curving" (as seen in American universities) means normalizing the grades. This would mean applying a transformation to the histogram/distribution of the marks such that whatever the majority of students recieve is considered "average" (or equivalent to a C+). If your mark was close to the mean, you get around a C or C+... if your mark was higher than the mean, you get a B or higher. If your mark was lower than the mean, you get a C- or lower.... you get the idea.

Normalizing the data (or true 'bell curving') actually makes it much more difficult to get a good grade (since most people are average), and only really benefits the entire class if everyone has a low mark (in which case it would be rewarding the students for failing... not good, and a lot of universities have been heavily criticized for grade inflation)

I've had professors here who don't understand what students are talking about when they ask if the grades will be curved... it doesn't happen in Canada... at least not to the extent that it does in the States, and certainly not to the extent that people seem to think it does.

Midterm marks are up. >_<

The average was 62%, but not all of the marks are up yet... apparently they will be available by later today.

Originally Posted by Taunton

I'm not sure people here understand what "bell curving" is... you don't automatically get a higher mark if the grades are actually transformed (or 'bell curved').

More often than not in Canada, the grades in classes are not "bell curved"... usually if a professor modifies the grades it's by making the denominator smaller (ie making the final grade out of of a smaller number). This would make everyone's mark a little bit better.

True "bell curving" (as seen in American universities) means normalizing the grades. This would mean applying a transformation to the histogram/distribution of the marks such that whatever the majority of students recieve is considered "average" (or equivalent to a C+). If your mark was close to the mean, you get around a C or C+... if your mark was higher than the mean, you get a B or higher. If your mark was lower than the mean, you get a C- or lower.... you get the idea.

Normalizing the data (or true 'bell curving') actually makes it much more difficult to get a good grade (since most people are average), and only really benefits the entire class if everyone has a low mark (in which case it would be rewarding the students for failing... not good, and a lot of universities have been heavily criticized for grade inflation)

I've had professors here who don't understand what students are talking about when they ask if the grades will be curved... it doesn't happen in Canada... at least not to the extent that it does in the States, and certainly not to the extent that people seem to think it does.

I always thought bell-curving was having a certain percentage of grades falling within a certain range. Something like 1% on the outer parts of the "bell" (top marks and low marks) with the majority of the grades (something like 85%) falling under the middle range of the "bell".

Therefore the average of the class doesn't actually dramatically change, it just means people with lower marks are slightly bell curved up while people with higher marks are slightly bell curved down, both towards the average of the class.

Originally Posted by jhan523

I always thought bell-curving was having a certain percentage of grades falling within a certain range. Something like 1% on the outer parts of the "bell" (top marks and low marks) with the majority of the grades (something like 85%) falling under the middle range of the "bell".

Therefore the average of the class doesn't actually dramatically change, it just means people with lower marks are slightly bell curved up while people with higher marks are slightly bell curved down, both towards the average of the class.

Or people with higher marks could potentially go higher too. Example, a person who has the highest mark on a test, say an 87, may get 100 due to the way a specific bell curve is designed for marks.

But yeah, most profs will just try to raise the mean by giving everyone more marks.

Originally Posted by jhan523

I always thought bell-curving was having a certain percentage of grades falling within a certain range. Something like 1% on the outer parts of the "bell" (top marks and low marks) with the majority of the grades (something like 85%) falling under the middle range of the "bell".

Therefore the average of the class doesn't actually dramatically change, it just means people with lower marks are slightly bell curved up while people with higher marks are slightly bell curved down, both towards the average of the class.

What you are describing is a transformation, albeit a simple one (tightening up a distribution which is already mostly normal). Most of the time professors don't need to fix the distribution since test scores tend to be normally distributed already.

In systems such as in US universities, many courses are graded on a curve from the start... this means that the number of students who will recieve each grade is predetermined (most students get a C+, fewer get C-/B+, etc.). Once test scores are determined, it's simply a matter of filling those bins... so if most students score 75% or 80%, those students will fall into the C+ bin, and so on, with the most exceptional students falling into the A or A+ range... this is why the student with the best mark "sets the curve" because everyone else must get a lower relative grade... if most students score 80% on a test, and one student scores 90%, that student will get an A+ and the majority of students (who scored 80's) will get C+ grades.

On the other hand, if most students get a 50% on the test, and one or two students score 75%... then those two students will get A's and the majority will get C+ grades.

Grading on a curve means grading students relative to others in their class, as opposed to grading based on their actual test scores. Standardized tests such as the MCAT, LSAT, SAT's ect. are all graded this way. Most Canadian university classes on the other hand, are not.

EDIT: There's an okay wikipedia article on this topic for more information... I can understand how many students (esp. first years) can have a problem understanding this, since they don't generally have much statistics background.

Let's hope for an easy final for Psych.. lol.

Originally Posted by Inferno

Let's hope for an easy final for Psych.. lol.

I wish :(

As well, I recently realized Experimentrix is all a sham. I thought by completing 2 hours worth of experiments, I would get a free 5% added on. Apparently, it just lowers the final exam weighing from 40% to 35%. Who would want to do that, especially if the final is supposedly easier than the midterm?

DON'T DO EXPERIMENTRIX, PEOPLE.

I didn't do so hot on the midterm, and it pisses me off. Those test questions were ridiculous. The practice questions were waaay too easy compared to the difficulty level and complexity of the questions on the exam.

Originally Posted by Inferno

As well, I recently realized Experimentrix is all a sham. I thought by completing 2 hours worth of experiments, I would get a free 5% added on. Apparently, it just lowers the final exam weighing from 40% to 35%. Who would want to do that, especially if the final is supposedly easier than the midterm?

DON'T DO EXPERIMENTRIX, PEOPLE.

Lowering your final exam from 40% to 35% means that you get 5% free. It means experimetrix is worth 5% of your mark should you choose to do it.

I really doubt it means that 5% of your final is redistributed over all of your other marked assignments/quizzes. Otherwise there would be no point in pushing experimetrix.

Originally Posted by Inferno

As well, I recently realized Experimentrix is all a sham. I thought by completing 2 hours worth of experiments, I would get a free 5% added on. Apparently, it just lowers the final exam weighing from 40% to 35%. Who would want to do that, especially if the final is supposedly easier than the midterm?

DON'T DO EXPERIMENTRIX, PEOPLE.

that's silly. Even if the exam is easy, it doesn't mean you're gonna get perfect.

I don't think anyone would say no to a free 5%. I'm not sure what you were trying to get at, but the mark is not distributed over other areas like Jeremy mentioned.

yea, experimentrix is definitely worth the 5%. especially since you only have to do 2 hours.

So, I don't know what the average was last year, but apparently this years average was higher. (Just something I've heard though, maybe John could confirm?)