I'm not really sure I buy into the idea that grade inflation leads to better job opportunities for law students. In fact, in "The one goes to 11," I mocked the practice. I pointed out, "Recently, there was a limited push by the SBA at USF to look at raising the median; I think it's withered on the vine." Therefore, it gives me no great pleasure to report that USF has decided to repaint the numbers on our grading dial. All current students should have received an email from Dean Micon today informing them of the change. Specifically, we are told that the new policy allows grades to "accurately reflect student achievement, provide students reliable information about their academic progress, and establish a basis for meaningful comparison with both classmates and counterparts from other institutions."

I'm at a loss to explain how any of those things is better accomplished by this changed policy. As I look at the tables, here's what I see: 1) One or two students, who would likely get the CALI anyway, not get an A+; 2) Professors no longer have to give out anything lower than a B- in any elective; and 3) The middle is fatter. There are some other changes, but they seem considerably less significant. Two classes saw the greatest impact. Constitutional Law and Evidence previously had 10% to 20% of students receiving grades of C- and below. Now, it's possible that no students will receive a C- or below.

I know that many students will be jumping for joy over this. A number will be thrilled with the changes to the grading of bar elective courses. I, personally, don't have a huge problem with it, other than that it throws of my spreadsheets and with the 4.3 value afforded A+'s, potentially my class rank extrapolations. That, and that I don't really see the point.