Blind Grading Forum

[Detrox]

+1. If I had read the rules on Grade Changes [posted above], I would have never asked about blind grading. An exam is an exam, not a vindication on your gleeful classroom participation. The one caveat might be a class requiring a fixed level of attendance.

You are still misreading that policy. It does not apply to class participation bumps, which professors can do. It only references situations where a professor wants to change a grade after it's been finalized.

I always was under the impression at NYU that the policy worked like this: Exams are graded blindly; separately, the professor submits to the registrar a list of a few people to bump up/down half a letter grade. So the prof only ever thinks, "Whatever grade Mr. Jones ends up with, I want to give him a half-grade bump because he was so well-prepared." The prof isn't in a position to see the results of the blind grading and think, "Mr. jones only got a B? He definitely deserved at least a B+, I'm going to bump him up." This means it's a significantly "blinder" process than what people here are discussing. I could be wrong, though.

I am not at NYU. But assuming a similar system applies at other schools, does this mean that professors do not know your grade? It is awkward running into profs from last semester, especially when accompanied by other students. I just imagine them saying to themselves: "There goes Mr. A- and Ms. B+." I did well in Torts. I went to ask my Torts professor for an LOR before most other grades had come out. She said:"Assuming you did well in your other classes, so-and-so professor would be happy to talk to you about Bankruptcy." That implies she knew, right?

Professors almost certainly know your grade after they have been reported, and probably before since it remains my belief that they choose to bump/drop you after they see what grade you have received on the exam, they just don't know who you are when they are assigning grades to the exams as they grade them.

[Renne Walker]

. . . .it remains my belief that they choose to bump/drop you after they see what grade you have received on the exam, they just don't know who you are when they are assigning grades to the exams as they grade them.

Sorry, not buying what u r selling. I cannot visualize a prof proclaiming, “Holy Smokes, I cannot believe little shy Janie who never contributes has an A, I need to mark her down.” Or, “What? My key man Bob got a B-, no way, he’s always prepared and answers all my questions spot on. Let me grab my prof cape and kick him up a grade point.” You think that is what happens? Seriously?

[queenlizzie13]

. . . .it remains my belief that they choose to bump/drop you after they see what grade you have received on the exam, they just don't know who you are when they are assigning grades to the exams as they grade them.

Sorry, not buying what u r selling. I cannot visualize a prof proclaiming, “Holy Smokes, I cannot believe little shy Janie who never contributes has an A, I need to mark her down.” Or, “What? My key man Bob got a B-, no way, he’s always prepared and answers all my questions spot on. Let me grab my prof cape and kick him up a grade point.” You think that is what happens? Seriously?

I don't think one person gets bumped down for every one person who gets bumped up. I do think people get bumped up and that is why I think there is some leniency in most schools curves to allow professors to bump up a few students per semester by a half grade.

So just because one student got bumped up does not necessarily mean the people on the tailend of the range of getting a B+ (those who barely made the cutoff) for example will get bumped down.

[birdlaw117]

. . . .it remains my belief that they choose to bump/drop you after they see what grade you have received on the exam, they just don't know who you are when they are assigning grades to the exams as they grade them.

Sorry, not buying what u r selling. I cannot visualize a prof proclaiming, “Holy Smokes, I cannot believe little shy Janie who never contributes has an A, I need to mark her down.” Or, “What? My key man Bob got a B-, no way, he’s always prepared and answers all my questions spot on. Let me grab my prof cape and kick him up a grade point.” You think that is what happens? Seriously?

My God that was an insufferably douchey post.

[Detrox]

. . . .it remains my belief that they choose to bump/drop you after they see what grade you have received on the exam, they just don't know who you are when they are assigning grades to the exams as they grade them.

Sorry, not buying what u r selling. I cannot visualize a prof proclaiming, “Holy Smokes, I cannot believe little shy Janie who never contributes has an A, I need to mark her down.” Or, “What? My key man Bob got a B-, no way, he’s always prepared and answers all my questions spot on. Let me grab my prof cape and kick him up a grade point.” You think that is what happens? Seriously?

My God that was an insufferably douchey post.

+1.

To address a couple things: 1. I never said that anyone who did not talk would be bumped down, in fact I specifically said the opposite, professors probably would never bump someone down for being shy or not talking; however, failing to be prepared for class and repeatedly getting things wrong when being cold called with/without notice, I could see a grade bump down. 2. As to the bump up scenario, yes, why not? Professors have reserved the right to change grades based on participation, they put notice of their intent to possibly change grades in their class syllabus, and they often mention it explicitly on the first day of class. Your only evidence that they do not do this is that it offends your sense of how a law school class should work...

So to answer your question in short, yes seriously.

[nymario]

At our school, the 1L curve is between 3.1 and 3.2. If a professor wants to leave room to bump, he has to leave space in his original grading - but he doesn't have to. Bumping is only up. If you are graded as a straight A+ on the exam and also get a bump (which is submitted *without* the professor knowing your grade) then it is simply cancelled out. A 4.667 would be a little weird.

[Renzo]

To address a couple things: 1. I never said that anyone who did not talk would be bumped down, in fact I specifically said the opposite, professors probably would never bump someone down for being shy or not talking; however, failing to be prepared for class and repeatedly getting things wrong when being cold called with/without notice, I could see a grade bump down. 2. As to the bump up scenario, yes, why not? Professors have reserved the right to change grades based on participation, they put notice of their intent to possibly change grades in their class syllabus, and they often mention it explicitly on the first day of class. Your only evidence that they do not do this is that it offends your sense of how a law school class should work...

So to answer your question in short, yes seriously.

As I explained before, at many schools the curve doesn't just have to have a specific median, but needs to conform to a distribution. SO IN ORDER TO BUMP SOMEONE UP, YOU ALMOST CERTAINLY HAVE TO BUMP SOMEONE DOWN TO OFFSET IT.

If you think a professor who has 90 exams is going to read them, grade them, distribute them on a curve, submit them, actively go through the result to see if he thinks that everyone who participated got a "fair" grade, then rearrange the entire class' exams to make sure it again conforms to the curve, you don't understand what motivates people to become law professors. And, this ignores the fact that the professor wrote the exam, so naturally the professor thinks it is a good and fair test of comprehension. It's not likely that the professor is going to think, "well, little Bobby seemed so smart in class, so maybe my test didn't really measure his understanding." It's more likely that the professor will think, "huh, guess little Bobby wasn't as smart as he seemed in class. Oh well."

[Renne Walker]

+1

To all those folks who live in the make believe world of bumps, I have to ask, where are the bumps recorded? Where is the bump transparency noted, do tell. Perhaps the prof gives the bumped student a wink, or sneer, depending on the direction of the bump.

Are we now supposed to believe our exam A was really an A- or A+, but the prof secretly adjusted our score? Seriously?

[AZN MegaPoaster]

+1

To all those folks who live in the make believe world of bumps, I have to ask, where are the bumps recorded? Where is the bump transparency noted, do tell. Perhaps the prof gives the bumped student a wink, or sneer, depending on the direction of the bump.

Are we now supposed to believe our exam A was really an A- or A+, but the prof secretly adjusted our score? Seriously?

Why do the bumps have to be recorded?

We aren't asking you to believe your exam was really an A- or an A+; we're simply asserting that you can never be sure.

[birdlaw117]

@Renzo,

You realize that most requires distributions are something like 6-8% A, 12-15%, etc., right? This means that there is the possibility of moving people around nd staying within those percentages. Particularly if a professor plans ahead and starts with the max % of B+ and the minimum % of A- tests. Then, the prof can bump 1, maybe 2 students and not have to bumP anyone down.

So yeah, it doesn't have to be zero sum necessarily (though you could still argue that there is a downward bump that happened at step 1).

Regardless, people are being unnecessarily douchey ITT and it's still probably a rare occurrence.

[birdlaw117]

+1

To all those folks who live in the make believe world of bumps, I have to ask, where are the bumps recorded? Where is the bump transparency noted, do tell. Perhaps the prof gives the bumped student a wink, or sneer, depending on the direction of the bump.

Are we now supposed to believe our exam A was really an A- or A+, but the prof secretly adjusted our score? Seriously?

Wtf is wrong with you? Seriously?

[buckilaw]

At my school, it means that the prof just sees an exam number when he is grading. He gives it a grade. Then he goes back and matches it up to the student. He then has the option of slightly raising or slightly lowering it in some classes for "participation." After that, hesubmits everyone's grades to the registrar. The registrar then has to approve of the curve he used.

So much for the myth that being active in class has no bearing on your grade. Now I wish I had listened to the advice someone offered me. . . .raise your hand and never take it down!

This is still largely no myth. Most law professors can barely be bothered to grade the exams, let alone put in the extra effort to learn names, take note of meaningful participation, and make according adjustments.

The key is to see if the professor actually mentions adjusting grades based on participation on the syllabus.

[AVBucks4239]

As I explained before, at many schools the curve doesn't just have to have a specific median, but needs to conform to a distribution. SO IN ORDER TO BUMP SOMEONE UP, YOU ALMOST CERTAINLY HAVE TO BUMP SOMEONE DOWN TO OFFSET IT.

If you think a professor who has 90 exams is going to read them, grade them, distribute them on a curve, submit them, actively go through the result to see if he thinks that everyone who participated got a "fair" grade, then rearrange the entire class' exams to make sure it again conforms to the curve, you don't understand what motivates people to become law professors. And, this ignores the fact that the professor wrote the exam, so naturally the professor thinks it is a good and fair test of comprehension. It's not likely that the professor is going to think, "well, little Bobby seemed so smart in class, so maybe my test didn't really measure his understanding." It's more likely that the professor will think, "huh, guess little Bobby wasn't as smart as he seemed in class. Oh well."

There is almost always flexibility in the distribution. To think that in a 90 person section, 6 people must earn A's, 8 people must earn A-'s, etc., is just not plausible. The more likely scenario is that the distribution calls for somewhere between 5-7 A's, 7-10 A-'s, etc. Thus, if somebody is bumped up, somebody does not necessarily have to be bumped down.

My school actually posts the grade distribution for each 1L class, I can assure you there is no strict curve that is followed. Just looking back at fall exams, in my section of about 45 people, there were 5 A's given in contracts, 3 in torts, 6 in civil procedure, and 5 in property.

[dixiecupdrinking]

+1

To all those folks who live in the make believe world of bumps, I have to ask, where are the bumps recorded? Where is the bump transparency noted, do tell. Perhaps the prof gives the bumped student a wink, or sneer, depending on the direction of the bump.

Are we now supposed to believe our exam A was really an A- or A+, but the prof secretly adjusted our score? Seriously?

So let's just clarify the order of events here.

You started this thread to talk about class participation bumps. Over the course of the thread you seemingly changed your opinion on whether they exist every time you posted, usually in the form of a complete non sequitur. Now you're dismissing the whole notion of grade bumps as inane. You're almost completely incomprehensible.

[Detrox]

As I explained before, at many schools the curve doesn't just have to have a specific median, but needs to conform to a distribution. SO IN ORDER TO BUMP SOMEONE UP, YOU ALMOST CERTAINLY HAVE TO BUMP SOMEONE DOWN TO OFFSET IT.

If you think a professor who has 90 exams is going to read them, grade them, distribute them on a curve, submit them, actively go through the result to see if he thinks that everyone who participated got a "fair" grade, then rearrange the entire class' exams to make sure it again conforms to the curve, you don't understand what motivates people to become law professors. And, this ignores the fact that the professor wrote the exam, so naturally the professor thinks it is a good and fair test of comprehension. It's not likely that the professor is going to think, "well, little Bobby seemed so smart in class, so maybe my test didn't really measure his understanding." It's more likely that the professor will think, "huh, guess little Bobby wasn't as smart as he seemed in class. Oh well."

There is almost always flexibility in the distribution. To think that in a 90 person section, 6 people must earn A's, 8 people must earn A-'s, etc., is just not plausible. The more likely scenario is that the distribution calls for somewhere between 5-7 A's, 7-10 A-'s, etc. Thus, if somebody is bumped up, somebody does not necessarily have to be bumped down.

My school actually posts the grade distribution for each 1L class, I can assure you there is no strict curve that is followed. Just looking back at fall exams, in my section of about 45 people, there were 5 A's given in contracts, 3 in torts, 6 in civil procedure, and 5 in property.

FTFY.

Renzo I usually respect your posts, but here you seem incensed and operating under the assumption I'm stupid. As previous posters pointed out, the fact that medians are set and that there is a strict curve does not mean that individual grade adjustments cannot occur without affecting others. NYU's grading curve is comprised of ranges and although strict, it is certainly not so strict as to make it impossible (or even really THAT hard) for one or two people to be bumped up without needing to bump others down. A quick look at the grade distribution given by professors shows that only somewhere around half (going on Fall 2011's numbers) of the classes hit the 31% maximum for the A tier, which leaves space for bumping up B+ people without affecting the requirement that no more than 57% be over B+. Some classes didn't even have 57% above a B+. There is a plethora of ways that a limited number of grade adjustments could occur without having to negatively affect other people.

As to your comments about how law professors work, I think you are simply applying a stereotype to too wide of a set. Not every professor reserves the right to change grades based on participation, and I'm sure of those that do even fewer actually do so on a regular basis. Finally, professors do not always write 100% of their tests (some professors write joint tests), and even those who do may not embrace their exam as the be all and end all of how their class is evaluated (despite the fact that that is the vastly predominant system for law school classes). The fact that they reserve the right to change grades at the start is evidence of their (read: a few to some but not most or all professors) belief that exams may be imperfect representations of students' deserved grade in a class.

Again, I'm not saying this happens all the time, but it's obvious that it can happen and my personal experience has anecdotally proven that it does happen. This will be my last reply in this thread as people are really not arguing with evidence or logic anymore but rather seem to be just putting their fingers in their ears and yelling that it doesn't happen. No idea why people are so impassioned about something which really isn't a huge deal since it happens rarely and is made known as a possibility to everyone at the beginning of a class...

Edit: One last note, the grading curve is only truly mandatory for 1L in the first place, meaning that upper level classes have even more flexibility in this area.

[fatduck]

tl;dr: Renne Walker is so fucking weird

[Renne Walker]

So let's just clarify the order of events here. You started this thread to talk about class participation bumps.

If you are thinking about ever doing anything in the law, you should consider getting your facts right. Look again, my question simply asked about the blind grading procedure, period.

Regarding bumps (which is entirely an offshoot of what I originally asked), I did not even suspect such a thing existed. After reading four pages about magical non-transparent bumps, sorry not a believer.

[dixiecupdrinking]

So let's just clarify the order of events here. You started this thread to talk about class participation bumps.

If you are thinking about ever doing anything in the law, you should consider getting your facts right. Look again, my question simply asked about the blind grading procedure, period.

Regarding bumps (which is entirely an offshoot of what I originally asked), I did not even suspect such a thing existed. After reading four pages about magical non-transparent bumps, sorry not a believer.

LMAO. Talk to me in a couple years about "doing anything in the law" and we'll see how that's worked out for each of us. Anyway, sorry for not reading your post history carefully enough, I'll write off that time on your invoice.

[Renne Walker]

NP, all is good. Keep that $5 on your invoice. . . might come in handy as you forge ahead with doc review. . . j/k

[Renzo]

As I explained before, at many schools the curve doesn't just have to have a specific median, but needs to conform to a distribution. SO IN ORDER TO BUMP SOMEONE UP, YOU ALMOST CERTAINLY HAVE TO BUMP SOMEONE DOWN TO OFFSET IT.

If you think a professor who has 90 exams is going to read them, grade them, distribute them on a curve, submit them, actively go through the result to see if he thinks that everyone who participated got a "fair" grade, then rearrange the entire class' exams to make sure it again conforms to the curve, you don't understand what motivates people to become law professors. And, this ignores the fact that the professor wrote the exam, so naturally the professor thinks it is a good and fair test of comprehension. It's not likely that the professor is going to think, "well, little Bobby seemed so smart in class, so maybe my test didn't really measure his understanding." It's more likely that the professor will think, "huh, guess little Bobby wasn't as smart as he seemed in class. Oh well."

There is almost always flexibility in the distribution. To think that in a 90 person section, 6 people must earn A's, 8 people must earn A-'s, etc., is just not plausible. The more likely scenario is that the distribution calls for somewhere between 5-7 A's, 7-10 A-'s, etc. Thus, if somebody is bumped up, somebody does not necessarily have to be bumped down.

My school actually posts the grade distribution for each 1L class, I can assure you there is no strict curve that is followed. Just looking back at fall exams, in my section of about 45 people, there were 5 A's given in contracts, 3 in torts, 6 in civil procedure, and 5 in property.

FTFY.

Renzo I usually respect your posts, but here you seem incensed and operating under the assumption I'm stupid. As previous posters pointed out, the fact that medians are set and that there is a strict curve does not mean that individual grade adjustments cannot occur without affecting others. NYU's grading curve is comprised of ranges and although strict, it is certainly not so strict as to make it impossible (or even really THAT hard) for one or two people to be bumped up without needing to bump others down. A quick look at the grade distribution given by professors shows that only somewhere around half (going on Fall 2011's numbers) of the classes hit the 31% maximum for the A tier, which leaves space for bumping up B+ people without affecting the requirement that no more than 57% be over B+. Some classes didn't even have 57% above a B+. There is a plethora of ways that a limited number of grade adjustments could occur without having to negatively affect other people.

As to your comments about how law professors work, I think you are simply applying a stereotype to too wide of a set. Not every professor reserves the right to change grades based on participation, and I'm sure of those that do even fewer actually do so on a regular basis. Finally, professors do not always write 100% of their tests (some professors write joint tests), and even those who do may not embrace their exam as the be all and end all of how their class is evaluated (despite the fact that that is the vastly predominant system for law school classes). The fact that they reserve the right to change grades at the start is evidence of their (read: a few to some but not most or all professors) belief that exams may be imperfect representations of students' deserved grade in a class.

Edit: One last note, the grading curve is only truly mandatory for 1L in the first place, meaning that upper level classes have even more flexibility in this area.

I certainly don't think you are stupid, and I agree that it is possible for a very small number of people to be bumped up/down, even in a "shaped" distribution like NYU's. What I have been trying to illustrate (apparently not very clearly) is that there are several steps, all of which take considerable effort by a professor, in order to make a "bump" possible; and that professors have no incentives, but several disincentives, to do so. One of those disincentives is that it requires the professor to actually put in the effort to keep track of trends of participation throughout the semester in a meaningful and comparative way (and learn names), in order to either a) "bump" a minuscule proportion of the class within the curve's tolerances or b) give themselves a headache byu ranking everyone twice so as to re-conform to the grading distribution. That's a lot of work for little payoff, especially among academics (a group not widely renowned for their interest in hard work).

If your point is to prove that it is possible that some professor somewhere is consistently "bumping" grades for class participation, then fine, you are right. There's always some irrational fuck someplace who would go think all the extra work is worth it. But, I stand by the assertion that anyone who thinks they can participate their way into a grade bump is a fool who is wasting their time. It's like winning the lottery, in that it's a certainty that it will happen to someone somewhere, but it's equally as certain that it won't happen to you.

There is one important caveat: none of this applied to downward bumps. This is easy for the professor, and he/she has considerable incentive to do it if s/he feels it is warranted. Bottom line is it's worth a student's time to be prepared and not be an ass, but not worth the time to go beyond this.

[queenlizzie13]

+1

To all those folks who live in the make believe world of bumps, I have to ask, where are the bumps recorded? Where is the bump transparency noted, do tell. Perhaps the prof gives the bumped student a wink, or sneer, depending on the direction of the bump.

Are we now supposed to believe our exam A was really an A- or A+, but the prof secretly adjusted our score? Seriously?

Bumping up a couple of people is not make believe. I went over a test with a professor who told me a couple of people were bumped up. Also unless you really participated a lot you know you were probably not bumped up. And most people who do get bumped probably don't know unless they went over the test with the professor and the professor told them in the office or something.

Furthermore, not every professor bumps people up.

[jimmythecatdied6]

As far as "grade bumps" go, it has everything to do with the teacher's grading policy. Many of my professors explicitly mention (in their syllabi) that they reserve the right to change individuals' grades based on attendance/participation. Obviously it's not an entirely "blind" process.

A lot of the people that don't participate/don't come to class refuse to believe that this will negatively affect their position within the curve, but the truth is that it's more likely that it does than it doesn't. I'm guessing Rene is one of those people...

[Renne Walker]

Bumping up a couple of people is not make believe. I went over a test with a professor who told me a couple of people were bumped up. Also unless you really participated a lot you know you were probably not bumped up. And most people who do get bumped probably don't know unless they went over the test with the professor and the professor told them in the office or something.

Furthermore, not every professor bumps people up.

Does bumping ever happen, you make a great case that it can. From day 1, I was advised the “exam” was the end all. Gunners were not advantaged, remembering the prof’s birthday was not beneficial, etc. Thus, I find it difficult to now embrace non-transparent bumps. Given the curve, and in some cases class ranking, bumping probably has an adverse effect on others.

My main question about blind grading has been adequately addressed. This controversial sideshow about bumps is an entirely different matter. Thank goodness Renzo has more than sufficiently explained it in detail.

[Renzo]

Renne is absolutely insufferable

And as far as "grade bumps" go, it has everything to do with the teacher's grading policy. Many of my professors explicitly mention (in their syllabi) that they reserve the right to change individuals' grades based on attendance/participation. Obviously it's not an entirely "blind" process.

A lot of the people that don't participate/don't come to class refuse to believe that this will negatively affect their position within the curve, but the truth is that it's more likely that it does than it doesn't. I'm guessing Rene is one of those people...

Speaking of absolutely insufferable, there's you. Did you not read anything said by anyone in this thread? Reserving the right to do it is not evidence that it ever happens; and, as I stated above at least 5 times, there's a good reason why professors might want to threaten to do it with no intention of following through.

Sometimes it's worth suffering people you disagree with, so that you actually understand what they are saying.

[jimmythecatdied6]

I'm just throwing my two cents into the ring. The fact that professors explicitly mention that they may/will take into account participation/attendance as a component of their grading process seems to me to be an indication that they actually do. You are perfectly entitled to draw the counter-intuitive inference from that sort of statement that they actually do not adjust grades after the fact.