PAGE 3
student caucus
May the curve be ever in your favour
JEFFREY HERNAEZ
Contributor
longer applies. The Central Limit Theorem (CLT) asserts that the distribution of a certain characteristic (grades
THIS YEAR, the Academic Policy
in this case) in a random sample will
a nd Pla n n i ng C om m it te e (A PPC)
approximate a “bell-curve” where cer(a part of Faculty Council here at
The Current Academic Rules
tain conditions are met. Most notaOsgoode), has been discussing the
In 1994, the current grading pro- bly, the CLT does not apply to groups
bell curve and its application to small
f ile at Osgoode was introduced. Apply- under thirty and when the group is not
classes. The scope of the discussion
ing to all classes, the f ixed prof iles are randomly selected. As such, the probincludes all seminars, intensive/clinical
shown in Figure 2.
lem is that many seminars and clinical
programs and classes with enrolments
Additionally, except in the D+/D programs are under the size of thirty
under thirty students. As one of your
range, the number of “plus” grades and consist of a group of students who
student representatives on the APPC, I
awarded in a given range may not selected to study a distinct area of law.
would like to take the opportunity to
exceed one-third of the total number of
Some of the proposed alternatives
give you an overview of the issues at
grades awarded in that range. However, to the current regime include adopthand and a chance to reach out with
there is some f lexibility in the applica- ing a different grading prof ile for small
any of your comments or concerns.
tion of the grading prof ile at Osgoode. classes, applying past performance proFirst, instructors are permitted to devi- f iles for small classes, or simply not
The History of Grading Prof iles
ate up to five percentage points from the applying a grading prof ile to small
at Osgoode
g r a d i n g classes at all. However, each of these
S i n c e
prof i le i n alternatives raise new concerns. For
1970, a gradYear 1
Years 2 & 3 Seminars
each range example, in regards to past perforing prof ile
w i t h o u t mance prof iles, the assumption that
A
10%
12%
22%
of some form
the autho - students who did well in pervious years
has been used
B
42%
43%
54%
rization of will continue to do well in future years
at t h e l aw
the Grades is arguably f lawed. Additionally, it may
C
42%
41%
23%
school. StartR e v i e w also be unsound to assume that a stuing that year,
D or F
6%
4%
1%
Committee. dent who did very well in large classes
the grades
S e c o n d l y , in first year will do just as well in small
in f irst year
t h e a c a - classes in the upper years.
cla sses were
FIGURE 1: GRADING PROFILES IN 1991.
demic rules
No matter what the chosen alternasubject to a
st ate t hat tive turns out to be, my goal as your
prof ile which
i n classes student representative is to listen to
“ f loated,” meaning that it was depenunder the size of 30, no C grades or your concerns and make sure they are
dent