Collegiate Times

What did you get on that test? How did you do on that essay? What is your grade in the class? There is always someone  (yes, I have been guilty of it, too) who always seems to need to know your grade.

Personally, I try not to discuss grades. If I did better than you on that test, that essay or have a higher grade in that class, then you come away feeling resentment and sadness.

If I did worse than you on that test, that essay or have a lower grade in that class, I come away feeling diminished while harboring some negative feelings toward you.

Either way, one of us is walking away feeling worse than before. This system is played out most brutally, however, by class rankings.

As you may have known already, class rank came out last week, and you know what that means.

It means it is time for the people at the top to thumb their noses at those at the bottom and those at the bottom to claim class rank doesn’t mean anything and doesn’t offer an accurate reflection of who is “smarter.”

If you ask graduate school admissions officers, they will probably tell you class rank matters, but does it give the most accurate depiction of brainpower?

Every year, U.S. News & World Report ranks all the universities in the country, but is that really what makes one school better than another? I didn’t come to Virginia Tech because it was ranked the highest according to a periodical. I came to Tech because I had family here and there was a strong sense of community.

Last time I checked, U.S. News & World Report’s collegiate rankings did not have those categories listed. Like the U.S. News & World Report rankings, class rank does not show other experiences that account for student’s academic success or failure.

I do believe in giving credit where credit is due. People who are No. 1 or toward the top of the class should be proud of their accomplishments. However, class rank does not take into account factors other than academic success.

It accurately reflects hard work and ability when comparing people in the same major. The difference in grades between two engineering students with similar classes does give us a window into who has better ability.

There are still distorting factors even within majors, as one professor may administer more difficult tests than another for the same class. However, with hard work and adequate study strategies, students should do well in their majors, if not in most other classes.

In-major class rank does give a good picture of who has the ability, but overall class rank does not. The in-major rankings compare people who take similar classes and are directed in similar methods of learning.

On the university-wide level, distorting variables have a larger affect.

Unquestionably, some undergraduate programs at Tech are better than others; the College of Architecture is the best in the country and the engineering program is not too shabby, either.

Those programs tend to be more rigorous than many of the other undergraduate programs Tech has to offer (although I am not saying degree programs other than architecture and engineering are a cakewalk). The difference in degree of difficulty between biochemistry and some other majors makes a pure comparison almost meaningless.

Additionally, personal outside factors are not considered when calculating class rank. These may include a death in the family, serious injury or a natural disaster near his or her hometown that can distract and detach students from their work.

So, does class rank accurately reflect who the best and brightest are at Tech? Class rank in-major does give an accurate picture of who are the best and brightest because it is a reflection of how well students have done in their areas of expertise. Overall class rank does not take in the rigor of each major, individual learning style, or other outside factors.

A version of this article appeared in the Oct 15 issue of the Collegiate Times.