Under what circumstances would you give a C grade to a PhD seminar paper that constitutes 100% of the course requirement?
Put differently, if the paper did not involve plagiarism, exceeded the minimum word count, and made arguments in support of the paper's thesis, under what circumstances would you fail the paper with a C grade?
I teach methods and people get Cs pretty frequently. I don't understand why people shy away from giving Cs in substantive courses. Sure, quality is more subjective in substantive courses, but that's really only a problem once you cross a certain threshold of quality. If somebody clearly does not understand the literature or hands in something completely illogical, why not give the person a C? I wouldn't give a person a C for taking a risk or an unconventional path, even if it ends up being a strange paper, but I would if it's clear they did not understand the material they were supposed to understand in the course.
I am not referring to a quant or methods research paper or exam where there is clear objectivity, for example two plus two is always four.
I teach methods and people get Cs pretty frequently. I don't understand why people shy away from giving Cs in substantive courses. Sure, quality is more subjective in substantive courses, but that's really only a problem once you cross a certain threshold of quality. If somebody clearly does not understand the literature or hands in something completely illogical, why not give the person a C? I wouldn't give a person a C for taking a risk or an unconventional path, even if it ends up being a strange paper, but I would if it's clear they did not understand the material they were supposed to understand in the course.
I am not referring to a quant or methods research paper or exam where there is clear objectivity, for example two plus two is always four.
I teach methods and people get Cs pretty frequently. I don't understand why people shy away from giving Cs in substantive courses. Sure, quality is more subjective in substantive courses, but that's really only a problem once you cross a certain threshold of quality. If somebody clearly does not understand the literature or hands in something completely illogical, why not give the person a C? I wouldn't give a person a C for taking a risk or an unconventional path, even if it ends up being a strange paper, but I would if it's clear they did not understand the material they were supposed to understand in the course.
The lowest I’ve ever given was a B-minus. At my school, anything in the Bs is viewed as a fail for grad students. But if it was an egregious case of a student who neither could/would do meaningful academic work (eg, a paper that leans heavily on Ann Coulter), I could easily justify a C.
Paper reveals that student doesn’t understand the literature, student fails to engage with the theory or evidence in a PhD-level way. Paper reads like it was written with someone with only undergrad only level of knowledge. Even PhD students have problems with writing at the level of the paragraph.
What does this mean?
Paper reveals that student doesn’t understand the literature, student fails to engage with the theory or evidence in a PhD-level way. Paper reads like it was written with someone with only undergrad only level of knowledge. Even PhD students have problems with writing at the level of the paragraph.
Who cares about grades in phd seminars? I give everyone an A and tell them no one cares, just start publishing.
Grades are an important signaling function. It’s necessary to weed out the incapable before they waste everyone’s time (perhaps most importantly: their own).
Who cares about grades in phd seminars? I give everyone an A and tell them no one cares, just start publishing.
Grades are an important signaling function. It’s necessary to weed out the incapable before they waste everyone’s time (perhaps most importantly: their own).
Strongly disagree. If you think they wrote a bad paper, just tell them that (and explain why). There’s no reason to use something as coarse as a letter grade to signal something to one of your ten students.
And performance in classes is a very noisy measure of capability. To get tenure, you need to write 10 good papers over about a decade. What they do in a 2-month semester while taking other classes reflects the capacity to write those papers very poorly.
Who cares about grades in phd seminars? I give everyone an A and tell them no one cares, just start publishing.
Grades are an important signaling function. It’s necessary to weed out the incapable before they waste everyone’s time (perhaps most importantly: their own).Strongly disagree. If you think they wrote a bad paper, just tell them that (and explain why). There’s no reason to use something as coarse as a letter grade to signal something to one of your ten students.
And performance in classes is a very noisy measure of capability. To get tenure, you need to write 10 good papers over about a decade. What they do in a 2-month semester while taking other classes reflects the capacity to write those papers very poorly.
Sometimes that’s true. Other times there are students who clearly don’t have what it takes. Letting them know is a mercy.
^outcomes are relatively the same whether you get good grades or not! Most students are not getting academic jobs.
You’re obviously not actually a professor. You’ll understand when you’re on the other side.
True.
You give a C?
Why not soak paper in urine. Moar effective and rooted in primate brain of humans.
^^ This guy is obviously a professor.
Who cares about grades in phd seminars? I give everyone an A and tell them no one cares, just start publishing.
Grades are an important signaling function. It’s necessary to weed out the incapable before they waste everyone’s time (perhaps most importantly: their own).
Strongly disagree. If you think they wrote a bad paper, just tell them that (and explain why). There’s no reason to use something as coarse as a letter grade to signal something to one of your ten students.
And performance in classes is a very noisy measure of capability. To get tenure, you need to write 10 good papers over about a decade. What they do in a 2-month semester while taking other classes reflects the capacity to write those papers very poorly.Sometimes that’s true. Other times there are students who clearly don’t have what it takes. Letting them know is a mercy.
Agreed. But just tell them directly. No one but the student ever sees the grade so it’s not like you’re signaling anything to hiring committees.
Who cares about grades in phd seminars? I give everyone an A and tell them no one cares, just start publishing.
Grades are an important signaling function. It’s necessary to weed out the incapable before they waste everyone’s time (perhaps most importantly: their own).
Strongly disagree. If you think they wrote a bad paper, just tell them that (and explain why). There’s no reason to use something as coarse as a letter grade to signal something to one of your ten students.
And performance in classes is a very noisy measure of capability. To get tenure, you need to write 10 good papers over about a decade. What they do in a 2-month semester while taking other classes reflects the capacity to write those papers very poorly.
Sometimes that’s true. Other times there are students who clearly don’t have what it takes. Letting them know is a mercy.Agreed. But just tell them directly. No one but the student ever sees the grade so it’s not like you’re signaling anything to hiring committees.
That’s just not true. I don’t know how your department works, but ours evaluates all pre-qual students regularly. Grades are part of that process that everyone sees.