That is so bad… I was thinking the last letter of

I took it as meaning birds are currently at 180 from dinosaurs and a further 180 will return them to dinosaur status, completing the full 360.

On the first point I agree. In my country, 40-50% is a pass usually and that seems crazy for its own reasons. But a curve can make that worse just as easily as it can make it better. The education system I work in is now introducing the idea that not only do you need to hit 50% to pass, you also have to show a competency with every learning outcome on the curriculum. We’ll see how it goes. My subject areas haven’t been hit yet.

The second point is essentially what I said, it’s a cop out for a teacher who is bad at setting exams. Easily fixed by some QA and/or collaboration. At least run it by a TA. Also they should read the curriculum before writing an assessment.

Grading on a curve is always absurd to me: it’s a cop out for teachers who don’t know how to set curriculum/exams properly and demeans the education process.

Should just be

• here’s a list of things you learn in this class
• you demonstrate understanding and skill over about 60% of that list
• you get a grade of 60%

I was sure this was going to be made up or AI slop but op came with receipts

Best advice. Players start the game knowing how and why they are going to stick together.

I’m also inclined to put my thumb on the scale a little as DM and give the players a loose connection that they can build on and incorporate into their characters while building. BG3 did it really well - everyone has a tadpole in their head, y’all gonna be mindflayers if you leave the group.

I recently had players all start as fresh recruits in an organisation - they got to decide the organisation - where the higher-ups put them together. Previously I did a one shot at level 5 where players already had an adventuring group together 20 years before and were called back together for one last mission.

Particularly bad to have this policy in healthcare