Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
When the bar exams become more difficult, X% of people would fail anyway.
Rather than make it difficult which really increases the stress level for everyone, marking it on a bell curve to allow (100-X)% of people to pass makes the most sense
|
Honestly, how is your suggestion any different from the soon-to-be implemented scheme?
A Rose by any other name is still a Rose. Sh*t by any other name is still Sh*t.
It's like how the Part A bar exam consistently fails the bottom 30-40% each year. If the bar examiners think too many people failed, they can just adjust the pass mark (which they have done).
You can call it a bell curve or making the bar "stricter", the end result is that the predetermined % of people will pass anyway.
Ipso Facto, they aren't going to keep to a 50/100 pass mark if 90% of the people fail.
Your suggestion will make no practical difference. In fact, making the exam harder, while not officially limiting the number of passes, makes people more inclined to band together and help each other pass. On the other hand, your suggestion makes it "harder" for everyone, who will perceive their classmates as enemies they must kick down to maintain the bell curve. Knowing that they need to "beat" 50% of the students will likely make everyone even more stressed, and push the passing mark higher than it currently is.
And a particular gifted year will find itself having a particularly high passing mark. Imagine passing on 30/100 because you had stupid year-mates, only to find that the next batch had to attain 80/100.