![\"chart](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/1780493539_122_thumbnail.jpeg\")
<\/p>\nThe percentage of failing grades in multiple UC Berkeley computer science classes in spring 2026 is significantly higher than past semesters and marks a departure from the department\u2019s grading guidelines.<\/p>\n
Instructors point to students\u2019 increased reliance on AI, lack of mathematical preparedness and understaffing as potential contributing factors.<\/p>\n
According to Berkeleytime, 35.3% of CS 10 students and 10.6% of CS 61A students received F\u2019s in spring 2026. In spring 2025 and spring 2024, the percentage of F\u2019s did not exceed 10% for either class. The electrical engineering and computer sciences department\u2019s grading guidelines state that 7% of students in lower division courses, including CS 10 and CS 61A, should receive D\u2019s and F\u2019s.<\/p>\n
In addition, the guidelines state that \u201ca typical GPA for a lower division course will fall in the range 2.8 \u2013 3.3.\u201d In spring 2026, both classes\u2019 average grades were C-pluses, according to Berkeleytime, corresponding to a 2.3 GPA.<\/p>\n
UC Berkeley teaching professor Dan Garcia taught both CS 10, \u201cThe Beauty and Joy of Computing,\u201d and CS 61A, \u201cThe Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs,\u201d in spring 2026. Garcia believes the \u201cprimary driver\u201d of these abnormally high failing rates is due to a \u201cvast increase in academic dishonesty\u201d due to students\u2019 usage of large language models, such as Claude, ChatGPT and Google Gemini.<\/p>\n
\u201cSome of the numbers that you saw from the number of students who receive failing grades were because we caught them (cheating) and prosecuted them and are sending their cases to the center for student conduct,\u201d Garcia said. \u201cBut in other cases, it\u2019s students who are leaning a little too hard on LLMs to do their work for them, and then at exam time just really aren\u2019t ready.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to Garcia, nearly 30 students in CS 10 were caught cheating on take-home exams in spring 2026.<\/p>\n
Neither of Garcia\u2019s classes this semester was graded on curves; instead, each letter grade has a point threshold. This means that students\u2019 grades do not depend on their peers\u2019 performances.<\/p>\n
Garcia believes that instructors \u201cshould not be curving\u201d but should instead make thresholds for each letter grade publicly available and give students many chances to reach them. He added that he loves the idea of \u201chaving no limit\u201d to the number of A\u2019s he gives students.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m a strong, strong opponent of what Harvard is doing to say that only a fraction of students can earn A\u2019s,\u201d Garcia said. \u201cI think you should have clear standards for what an A means, and then give tons of opportunity for people \u2026 to get to that A bar without lowering the standard. So everybody who\u2019s curving is hiding that effect.\u2029It\u2019s completely hiding that effect, and it\u2019s pretending as if nothing\u2019s wrong, and something is definitely wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n
In addition to overreliance on AI, Garcia also pointed out that many students are underprepared mathematically, a concern echoed by campus associate professor Gireeja Ranade.<\/p>\n
Ranade noticed a similar lack of prerequisite mathematical skills in her spring 2026 EECS 127 class, \u201cOptimization Models in Engineering,\u201d which she described as \u201cdifferently challenging\u201d to teach this semester. The class saw a 16.8% F rate, far higher than the 5% of D\u2019s and F\u2019s that the EECS department describes as \u201ctypical\u201d for an upper division course.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Ranade said students are expected to enter the course having taken classes on linear algebra, vector calculus and mathematical proofs. However, she found out in office hours that many students struggled with linear algebra, and was even more shocked when one student told her the linear algebra class they took at UC Berkeley had an \u201copen-internet, open-AI policy\u201d for homework and exams.<\/p>\n
Both Garcia and Ranade have joined more than 1,300 UC faculty in signing a petition\u00a0calling for<\/a> the reinstatement of ACT and SAT standardized testing scores for STEM admissions in the UC system. The petition and its accompanying open letter detail similar concerns with students\u2019 mathematical preparation.<\/p>\n Ranade also changed the structure of the course this year. Previously, EECS 127 included a final project completed with the guidance of the professor and a team of TAs. Due to a lack of staff, Ranade had to remove this portion of the class, on which she said most students get high scores.<\/p>\n