Here is a table that illustrates rather more than the CSE WAM ---or any other WAM for that matter--- in my opinion. [KenR] All data relate to recent actual medal possibilities. For complex reasons, students A and B were being compared, and also students B and C.[BillW]
| Student | CSE WAM | Mean | Median | Mode | Max | No of Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Student A | 92.1 | 89.81 | 91 | 90 | 98 | 2 |
| Student B | 89.9 | 89.29 | 93 | 100 | 100 | 6 |
| Student C | 85.8 | 84 | 85 | 83 | 97 | 1 |
The CSE WAM makes Student A look well ahead of Student B. The ordinary unweighted average makes them looked much closer. Indeed my guess is that the difference in the CSE WAM is largely due to the stage weighting of the difference between the Thesis B marks.
The rest of the information seems to make Student B look better than Student A. Isn't it extraordinary having a mode (the mark with the greatest frequency) of 100!!
Of course what I am saying is not that Student B is better than Student A ---they are both outstanding--- but rather that the CSE WAM is very misleading.
Also, you will notice that Student C is a step down from the other two.
Perhaps this could be discussed at tomorrow's TC?
Cheers,
Ken