3.2 just seems ridiculously high. i'm at 3.0 right now (praying it will only go up), and according to the handbook that's a "with honors" gpa. so basically, about 60% of the class is in "with honors" standing. crazy.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
BTW I just got all my grades but one:
C (2 credit)
B- (3 credit)
B- (3 credit)
B (3 credit)
for an average so far of 2.64. My missing class is a 4 credit class. My school uses a 2.8 curve. I'm pretty darn upset about it right now but I'll be over it by tomorrow morning after I eat some greasy pizza and chocolate bars! LOL.
But seriously, is a 2.64 on a 2.8 curve really awful? I'm being told it's about right.
I don't see how I couldn't at least consider transfering. I couldn't happier with my professors, the administration, etc. On the other hand, my wife is attending graduate school too; her program is unranked and doesn't even offer her desired concentration. Unlike me, she got into top 10 schools, so I have felt guilty for subjecting her to a sub-par acedemic experience.
I will have to weigh all the options and make the final decision after next semester.
i guess what i want to know is, why do schools continue to place such a strong emphasis on socratic method? why don't schools get more creative and pressure their professors to give their students periodic tests throughout the semester, or write papers for grades during 1L classes?That is the way it has always been and always will be. Remember, this method teaches one to think.
You answered your own question as far as the "lowered-tier" comment.
I am old and "suredly" was what I grew up with.
Yes this is pretty routine for big law firms. Especially if you've made it past the grunt work and training of a new hire.