I’m channelling Weber, having had too much of him for the last few days. Reading about and listening to definitions of ideal types, formal and substantive rationality, and the bureaucratic system made me think about the idiosyncracies of our own.
Okay okay, it’s not actually about that. It just sounds cooler.
Seriously, I was looking at my term papers’ requirements and I remembered one of my profs/lecturer had a qualification on due dates. Basically s/he said something about losing half a grade per day for late work, then elaborated with: that means an A grade will become A- etc.
That’s where the inconsistency in our grading system comes in. Warning: those with an intense dislike of math should either skip, skim or take for granted the following 2 paragraphs.
You’d think that normally, a difference of one grade would mean the difference between A and B. Except that we have an increasing progression on a scale of B, B+, A-, A. So saying “half a grade” is misleading because we DON’T HAVE half grades, we have one third of a grade. If you think about it, it’s reflected in the CAP system too. The difference between a B and an A is 1.5 points, whereas that between an A and an A- is 0.5. One third.
And the numbers make you think differently, that a 4.0 and a 5.0 is a difference of one, therefore the difference between B+ and A is one grade. Or something. It doesn’t really make sense to me except that it’s somewhat easier to count in halves than in thirds.
And people wonder why I say the system screws us over. Yes, yes, it’s just semantics, there isn’t really a problem saying half a grade if everyone understands what it means, but it’s still an inconsistency. An irrationality, if you will.
Oh and to sheshe: I’m getting round to writing that post soon. Really.






