60ish percent is a very particular number, because it's the highest weight that doesn't make it possible to pass the class by doing almost nothing except the exams. At 65 percent, you're giving students an easy way to game the system.
Some classes had a substantial lab component, but it was relatively easy to score well on labs. Labs were graded by TAs, who were consistently more lax than the professor. I don't think there's some coordinated effort by TAs to lower the bar; they were simply too busy with their own studies to provide a thorough criticism of every lab report they received. In most classes, labs were effectively a curve.
English courses were different, since those had essays instead of exams. However, I'd argue that it's feasible to write a paper "to the rubric" in the same sense that one can shape their studies "to the test." Given the audience HN caters to, I'd imagine that we're more interested in the science/math/engineering stuff anyway.
> You're delusional if you think that you're gonna get a 4.0 by half-assing course work
Nobody employing such a strategy was trying to get a 4.0 in the first place. In fact, setting the benchmark GPA for rigorous postsecondary education at 4.0 is itself delusional.
> The SAT covers fairly basic topics that nearly every student should know, that's why it's like an IQ test
Having taken two IQ tests administered by two different psychologists, I can confidently say no. The SAT does not resemble an actual IQ test. The SAT doesn't test short-term memory, and it only indirectly tests associative thinking.
That said, there's probably a correlation with IQ test scores, because smart people are smart, and so they perform well at tasks designed to test intelligence... just like how being good at taking tests in high school, means you'll probably be pretty good at it in college too.
It's not trivial to go from performance on a single test to performance throughout the year, which will include long-form writing, lab work, and other forms of learning.
https://slate.com/technology/2019/04/sat-prep-courses-do-the...
Not to mention, what about us test-disabled people?
I didn't know I had ADHD and its "friends" when I took the ACT, and I could have potentially benefited greatly from the reasonable accommodations the test allows for. However, it's not like every child is required to have some kind of psychological evaluation while in school.
I find all of this standardization in testing to be nothing more than Goodhart's Law in full swing.
Just what we need, more "Teaching to the Test" and route memorization in our education system...