Quote:
A - 93-100%; 90-100%
B - 85-92%; 80-89%
C - 77-84%; 70-79%
D - 70-76%; 60-69%
F - Below 70%; below 60%
|
Now -this- is interesting to me, because here it has -always- been the case that letters correspond like so:
A - 80-100%
B - 70-79%
C - 60-69%
D - 50-59%
F - 0-49%
The only exception I've ever come across in Canada has been when I was in Air Cadets, when our courses put failing grades at below 60%
This raises a very interesting question to me, namely: If I submit a paper in Canada, and get a 70% and thus a B, if I submitted the same paper to the same course in the same year in the United states, what mark would I get?
If the difference in the system is indicative of simply a narrowing of the mark bands, then I ought to get an 85%/80% in each of Relambrien's examples, because the quality is the same regardless of who marks the paper. If however, the numbers are intended to be the same, and just the requirements to get grades are substantially more strict, then I'd still get a 70%, just I'd get a D/C as my letter grade.
I'm -assuming- that the difference is cosmetic, and A-level work is A-level work in both systems, and just where I'd get an 80-100 you'd get a 93/90-100.
What this suggests to me though is that our system is better because it allows for a finer distinction between each student's work. If you only have a range of 30% in which everyone who meets your expectations must fall, your marks less accurately reflect the comparison between each student's work than you do in a range of 50%