Following the change in our grading curve policy last year (the median GPA is being bumped up from 3.0 to 3.3, and giving out C's is now optional, not mandatory) many students asked our dean, fairly I think, "what is the transition plan?" inasmuch as three years of students will have transcripts with grades collected under both the old and new systems.
Unfortunately, the dean's solution is to send out a math problem to law firms in the form of a transcript cover letter:
Dear Employers:After surveying the grading policies of comparable law schools, the UCLA School of Law determined in 2005 that its grade distributions were significantly lower than those of many comparable schools. Therefore, beginning in the Fall 2005 semester, the School of Law changed its grading curve in both the first year and upper division courses to better align our student GPAs with those of similarly situated students at these institutions. Set forth below are both the previous grade curve at the UCLA School of Law and the new curve.
[impenetrable numerical minutiae follows]
Lawyers enjoy math about as much as psychiatrists enjoy Tom Cruise movies. This letter, duly attached to hundreds of transcripts, will raise the same thought in hundreds of firm recruiters' brains: What the fuck is this!?? And then, the same response: Guess I better ignore it.
I have a suggested revision to the cover letter, in the interests of clarity.
Dear Employers:Congratulations! Your relentless focus on GPA as a measure of candidate quality has paid off. UCLA has inflated its grade curve to give you more satisfaction in hiring UCLA grads. By using a proprietary technology called Mathematics (pat. pending), we have in one stroke made all of our graduates appear more qualified -- by boosting their GPAs -- without making them substantively more qualified.
We think this change will make our graduates more competitive in the job market, help them bill more hours, and allow your partners to drive even nicer cars than they do now.
Best regards, etc.
28 Jul 05