Dear would-be UChicago 0Ls, please click on this title. Forum

[BlackSwan85]

Wowza, I didn't know about this. Any plans to lower the honors/high honors status in light of this?

You are a 1L, right? At least it gives you extra incentive to study hard for Crim and Contracts.

There are no such plans, as far as I know.

[cornellbeez]

Only 10? Aren't all classes 10+?

[Ghost]

.

[BlackSwan85]

Only 10? Aren't all classes 10+?

Yes, nearly all are. I am aware of only one class that had less than 10 students last quarter.

[Emma.]

Only 10? Aren't all classes 10+?

Yes, nearly all are. I am aware of only one class that had less than 10 students last quarter.

BlackSwan, did you see Dean Schill's email today?

[Ghost]

.

[0L Hoping for 1]

Dean Schill says they didnt change the curve or grading policies. He says they were rumors.

[Sentry]

Dean Schill says they didnt change the curve or grading policies. He says they were rumors.

That's good to hear.

[trudat15]

Dean Schill says they didnt change the curve or grading policies. He says they were rumors.

That's good to hear.

WHAT?! I'm going there for RIGOR, though.

[California Babe]

Dean Schill says they didnt change the curve or grading policies. He says they were rumors.

That's good to hear.

WHAT?! I'm going there for RIGOR, though.

Don't worry. Still plenty of time to get curvepwned during 1L.

[trudat15]

Dean Schill says they didnt change the curve or grading policies. He says they were rumors.

That's good to hear.

WHAT?! I'm going there for RIGOR, though.

Don't worry. Still plenty of time to get curvepwned during 1L.

Sweet. Cant wait.

[le_taon]

Dean Schill's e-mail also said they'd reviewed the grades from last quarter. Except lots of people still don't have grades from last quarter.

You do the math.

[BlackSwan85]

I am reposting a response to Dean Schill's email because I think it gets at the issue that his assurances attempted to evade better than I could:

'Dear Dean Schill,

I write out of concern that your letter -- reassuring us that "the Law School’s grading curve" has not changed -- may not have entirely addressed [redacted] X's stated concern regarding smaller classes and/or seminars.

At the beginning of the year, Section 1.13 of the Law School Student Handbook, as it appeared on page 105 of the student planner, stated, "There is a mandatory curve for classes of more than 50 students.... We encourage professors in all classes to adhere to the recommended curve, though the median may be slightly higher for seminars." (emphasis added).

This language has been entirely eliminated from the Student Handbook as it appears online.

This change to the Student Handbook might be seen as supplying more basis than simple "rumor" to the suggestion that there are modifications at work in the law school's grading system.

I encourage you to put this lingering confusion to rest, and to address this issue in a forum more publicly accessible than an LSA meeting.'

In short, the issue isn't whether the curve has changed. The issue is, whether the curve is now mandatory for classes of 10+ people. In the past, professors were allowed to curve at their discretion in all classes that consisted of 50 and less people. We want to know what has happened to that policy.

Dean Schill's email did not answer that question. Instead of breathing a sigh of relief, we are even more concerned over such evasiveness. Moreover, the complete (and entirely silent) elimination of the relevant language from the Handbook that the quoted email refers to pretty clearly suggests that alterations are in fact occurring.

Also allow me to add that I have received none of my grades back and neither have the vast majority of my friends. (The only ones to have received grades back without fail appear to be 1Ls). We should have had everything in as far back as the 18th.

In short, to consider the matter put to rest would be a mistake.

[Sentry]

Has there been anymore news?

[buster]

I was in a seminar last quarter with a little over 10 people and know for a fact that we were graded on a 177 curve. The range in grades, in my opinion, were disproportionately large to the actual differences in performance. I know this because my professor explained the breakdown of the grades, how many people got certain grades on the different components of the grade, and how the grades had to be adjusted to the curve. The professor told me faculty were not allowed to tell us any specifics about the curve. But from having spoken to people in my class, I know there was a large range of grades.

This seminar was easily the easiest of my classes but my worst grade last quarter - an uncharacteristically low grade. I just don't see how the professor can make meaningful distinctions in a class that small that met only 9 times. In fact, the professor expressed this much and said that if he could grade on an absolute level, he would have given a number of students better grades.

I understand the virtues of having a curve and the signaling effect. But I disagree with ATL's retort - judges looking for a clerk are not going to knowingly take the B student from UChicago over a student from [name peer school] who has a combo of high passes and passes (I could be wrong about the specifics on such a grading system, but the point is the same) since there is a higher probability that this person has an A average. As a result, more people on aggregate from [name peer school] will be chosen over UChicago grads. Perhaps a bad illustration, but it makes the point, right?

Maybe the right answer is not inflating the median for seminars, but something definitely needs to be done.

[Ghost]

.

[prezidentv8]

--ImageRemoved--

140

[Hamilton]

Wow, I must be out of the loop. I knew of the grading controversy, but only now heard the details. As a transfer to Chicago, I have had the grading system explained to me at least three different ways. I'm still not sure what my first quarter grades mean.

[Hannibal]

IAATL

[dcpolitico]

Note: This is what most schools outside the T14 already do.