Likewise, they had a system where disciplinary records could be appealed at any time while you were at school, but they only held evidence for a year. So if you get caught drinking underage as a Sophomore, you could appeal as a Senior, argue that since there's no evidence that you committed the act it should be removed from your record, and win. Like the obfuscated pass-fail system, this was basically only for the students trying to get into Med/Law school, and IMO was a kind of underhanded way to working around an unreasonable standard.
My main point was that, at least in their perception, this is something happening at many/most UC campuses
On the plus side, high grade + long ago remains a signal.
Its all Goodhart's law problem, but we are missing the forest for the trees talking about grades and tests when what we want is people to be educated, and critical thinkers and competent in their area and due to a comprehensive way to evaluate that we end up talking about grade inflation or how Yale vs Berkeley gives letters at the end of a semester
Universities exist as gatekeepers and credentialing bodies. Their purpose is to certify that a person has studied some topic in depth and is an expert in it. They promote education indirectly, by giving people an incentive to study.
A good university is one where anyone with a degree is guaranteed to be highly knowledgeable in their field of study. This makes it easier for anyone who might want to employ or do research with graduates, as there is no need to test their knowledge.
By this metric, universities have failed spectacularly. This is particularly obvious in computer science. Employers routinely ask CS graduates to solve data structure/algorithm problems in interviews, because a degree is not enough to prove that somebody knows this stuff.
No one is intentionally lowering the quality of instruction or trying to trip students up. They are trying to get them to pass the same bar that generations of students before them passed fine...
>Intentionally lowering the quality of instruction, as well as deliberately trying to trip students up on exams
I was happy with the quality of the instruction, and I didn't feel I was being "tripped up" on exams.
It's not about "hunger games", it's about challenging students to learn a lot of material and learn it well. Again, if that's not what you want, just don't attend.
The number of places where this environment exists is getting smaller every year: https://xcancel.com/CJHandmer/status/2060144837157118307#m
I'm glad the professors at Cal are working to preserve it there.
Maybe we can use AI to create new exams that grade people on professional capability, and then gate entry into other professional degrees?
Hmm, Where would the teachers come from, and how good would the education actually be?