Frank wrote:I don't get why people don't want it changed. Probably jealous 2Ls and 3Ls.
I think one of the concerns is the granularity. There's really not much difference between A and A-. It means you did very well. I think the big division is between B+ and B. B+ basically means you did well, and B means you didn't do so hot, but not bad either. This distinction gets lost if you lump both B+ and B into a "Pass" grade.
So the people at the top of the class are slightly opposed because under the current system they're hot stuff anyways, people at or slightly above median are opposed because they want to be distinguished from the B students, and only people below median are for it, since they are the ones who primarily benefit. And, nobody really cares because it won't apply to the current students, and it doesn't change the faculty's job at all.
I'd also add that the supposed "chillness" of schools that do HP/P/LP/F may not have so much to do with the grading system than the atmosphere of the school. Several HLS 1Ls who I have talked to have said it seems just as competitive with the new grading system, and employers basically end up translating HP into A/A- and P into B+/B.
That said, I'm in favor of changing the system, largely because the +/- distinctions are artificial. Our crim law professor basically said he has a really easy time with the As/A-s because they are clearly a step above the other exams. Similarly, the B- and Cs are pretty clearly deficient. But within those brackets, he said it is very hard to distinguish between a B and B+ or an A and A-, and that any attempt to do so is largely arbitrary. Even before fitting to the curve, he says the raw scores on the exam have a clump of ~20% at 25 (out of 30), a clump of ~70% at 20, and a few stragglers at 15 or below.