I freely admit that in the world of grades I can be a bit more anal. Nothing motivates me t
o study like a brilliant friend (pictured) getting a higher mark unless it is brilliant friends getting higher marks (not pictured). Coupled with my desire to do no more than is economically-efficient, it becomes necessary to calculate just how much more time needs to be spent in the books in order to raise my grade by the appropriate increment. (Given an uncomfortably wide margin of error, I additionally assume that my colleague's grades will rise slightly.)Apparently, Glasgow University has a reputation for not inflating grades which is great and probably would make my mom happy. It's nice to know that the mark I receive is the mark I deserve... but it would also be nice to know what exactly that mark means. In the alternative universe that is this university, a B doesn't correspond to a B, and percentages don't correspond to percentages. Confused? Join the club! It's like playing rock-paper-scissors where you know that paper beats rock and scissors beats paper and rock beats scissors, without any clue as to why!
Then there is the reality that full marks aren't given because, apparently, that would mean that the student should be teaching the course and not the professor. In other words, "Because I said so" beats rock, paper, and scissors!
Despite the fact that even the professors are at a loss to explain the grading system to befuddled North American students, marking seems to be fair. But it throws a monkey- wrench into my marginal analysis of just how much additional studying is needed in order to outperform my good friends.
It's a good thing that I'm relatively non-competitive or I might start to obsess over this.
No comments:
Post a Comment