|
Alou,
I think that's the sad thing about this though. Many people are bad at taking tests, they can score poorly while also fully understanding the material. They can run out of time, while still understanding the material.
I used to always finish my tests first, and I would wonder "what is taking every body so long to do this? They either know the answer or they don't."
That's because I am good at tests. Others are not. That doesn't mean they don't understand. It just means they're bad a tests.
People who are good at tests already have a very big advantage in school. I know because I had this advantage and it allowed me to coast through high school and university while barely lifting a finger.
I do not feel that this policy serves to benefit any body except people who are already really good at taking tests, people who will have no problem meeting the time deadline.
edit: Souma, that post was directed at you because you implied that the swedish guy should either start a revolution or get with the program. 
|
In the workforce, there will be companies or govt dept that specifically state to submit tenders before the deadline. If you miss it, there are no reprieves or excuses allowed. The error is clearly the fault of the student. If they don't like the rules they should take it up with the prof or a higher body beforehand
|
On March 05 2011 08:55 mikeymoo wrote:
The TA briskly walks over, scribbles a red "X" on his exam
The way the OP described it, this is how I imagined the TA going towards the student:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wiCDR.png)
Some people are here complaining about the TA. However, OP stated it was clearly written that a X will be given out for those who fail to stop after the second warning... as if the first warning was not enough.
I consider it fair. He took the risk, he was caught, and he was punished for it.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
edit: Souma, that post was directed at you because you implied that the swedish guy should either start a revolution or get with the program.
Ah, "get with the program" is quite the misinterpretation. It's more like, just realize your ideals don't make the world, and like you said, you just gotta move on.
|
On March 05 2011 09:56 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 09:50 Hynda wrote:On March 05 2011 09:43 slyboogie wrote:On March 05 2011 09:30 Hynda wrote:
Rules are rules. If a student has a problem with the rule, he should bring it up with the professor before the exam, not after the fact. I wouldn't consider it a trap because he specifically went over his policy in a previous class like you said. I really respect the prof/TA for sticking to his guns, whereas in my experience most profs/TAs are pathetically easy for students to walk over, and they take advantage of that.
This is peoples futures. Setting up arbitrary rules that has no effect other than failing people that try hard to show of what they've learnt is malicious bullshit. It goes against every fiber of what a teacher should be doing providing nothing but a oppertunity to bully. What if he had said "you can't use the word "and" " or the letter "S" for that matter. would it have been "Rules are rules" then? And yes asking someone to stop writing mid sentence is just as unreasonable as the above mentioned suggestion, it can make or break an entire essay if you're not allowed to round up. I think what is just isn't necessarily the question here. In a university classroom, the professor is basically the law. Just like a judge in the courthouse or an Admiral on a warship. It can be unfair and tyrannical but at least in this student's case, he had the option to 1. not go to university 2. not take that class 3. stop writing It may not be right (or "write," hehe) but it was the "malicious bullshit" rule. I think it's unfortunate and if I ran the classroom, I would not do that but in some environments, power is legitimately used in such a manner. No this is the mentality that needs to be washed out. If you behave in a unacceptable manner, then you are the problem. Not the ones forced upon people in the class room. No you don't have a choice because some classes are required for you to take to advance to the stuff you want to do. I hate it when people think they are just someone elses bitch for no reason. You pretty much never just have to take it up your backside. If there were no students the schools would all die out, they are there for you no the other way around. This is a very Ethics 100 point. Power naturally causes this reaction, particularly when the action is contrary to your morality. That is fine and I respect those feelings. However, this is not a system where "power is derived from the people," or some kind of democratic forum. It is a classroom where the professor commands some kind of authority that domineers over your ideas of fairness and justice. I'm sorry but his classroom, his rules. This DOES NOT apply to a government or society. If you feel that you do not have the agency to NOT attend the class, that is fine. Then you have to attend the class with the given rules where you now have two options. Follow the rules and hate yourself OR violate the rules, retain your dignity and suffer the unjust consequences.
Indeed and I would have, I would have rounded off handed it got a 0, talked to my professor gotten his view on the matter and if I still felt it was completly out of bounds I would have gone to his employer and taken it up with them, If I still felt it was completly unjust I would either contemplate not taking the class or take the class ignoring that particular rule.
I take pride in my work and I don't turn in things that are not up to my standards. I'm just extremly tired of students getting trodden on for no reason. It's like there is no fire left in anyone, a professor could walk into class and say "You've all failed, because I can not be arsed" and people would go "Oh, that's a bit bad, oh well it was probably my own fault". And yes I am biased as hell.
And don't get me wrong I love that peope are disagreeing with me on this, that's what's so great about discussion. I can see this as about as unfair and stupid as I want,it's not going to change anyones mind that thinks its okey to act this way. And it probably won't change my mind I still like to hear their opinions it broadens perspectives.
And while I feel very strongly about the subject i have no personal vendetta or any experience of being marked down for cheating/breaking any kind of test rule, at least not that I can remember.
|
On March 05 2011 10:03 MoreFaSho wrote:
I was just talking about this exact situation with a friend the other day. I have no problem with a rule like this, I just think the rule is overly punitive with the way many classes are graded*. Why not instead reduce the student's score by 20%, enough for it to be guaranteed punishment, but not enough to ruin someone's grade for the entire class for one (in the grand scheme of things small) lapse in judgement. Even 30, 40, or 50% would be bigger, more reasonable, but still a large punishment.
I had a guy sitting next to me in high school ask me for an eraser during an exam and the teacher assumed he was cheating and instantly ripped up the test without figuring out the situation.
*In high school most of my classes were 90+ some for of A, 80-89 some form of B, etc. which makes getting a 0 on a large part of your grade irrecoverable no matter how well you do on everything else. In college, classes were actually impossibly hard sometimes where 60% was a very good score, getting 0 obviously would still be devastating, but it wasn't actually impossible to recover from such a result.
eh i disagree with this example
the OP's is a little silly, but this one's completely the student's fault. you need an eraser, you raise your hand for a proctor to come and talk to you. you don't speak to fellow exam writers, that's just suicide. there's so many ways to cheat if you allow this in any form. i 100% agree on no-tolerance there.
On March 05 2011 10:06 SpicyCrab wrote:Alou, I think that's the sad thing about this though. Many people are bad at taking tests, they can score poorly while also fully understanding the material. They can run out of time, while still understanding the material. I used to always finish my tests first, and I would wonder "what is taking every body so long to do this? They either know the answer or they don't." That's because I am good at tests. Others are not. That doesn't mean they don't understand. It just means they're bad a tests. People who are good at tests already have a very big advantage in school. I know because I had this advantage and it allowed me to coast through high school and university while barely lifting a finger. I do not feel that this policy serves to benefit any body except people who are already really good at taking tests, people who will have no problem meeting the time deadline. edit: Souma, that post was directed at you because you implied that the swedish guy should either start a revolution or get with the program.
i find it hard to believe that someone who fully understands material is unable to complete most tests on time. i've had maybe one or two tests in my entire university career that were legitimately long; however most of them are quite short, relatively. if you look at a question and you don't immediately know how to approach it, your understanding of the material isn't that good (not enough practice with such problems etc). i don't think it's a matter of test-taking ability (whatever that means). on most tests, i spend [i]maybe half the time writing. the other half is me trying to figure out the approach to questions i don't know/understand well enough (due to bad studying or skipping related lecture etc)
i don't know, this just seems like a very foreign concept to me.. i've never met anyone who understands the material really well (i.e. able to tutor/teach his buddies on it) and yet be unable to write most exams with a fair amount of time to spare.
note: i kept writing "most exams" because some exams (very few) are just quite exceedingly long. i distinctly recall a third year exam in one of my finance courses where i would look at a question, immediately know the approach to it, run through the calculations without erasing anything, and keep on trucking. i barely finished (like 1 minute to spare), and i spent exactly 0 seconds of that test thinking about how to approach a problem. most people didn't finish, and i didn't do that well either due to being rushed like that. but that type of test i find is definitely an exception.[/b]
|
On March 05 2011 09:50 Hynda wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 09:43 slyboogie wrote:On March 05 2011 09:30 Hynda wrote:
Rules are rules. If a student has a problem with the rule, he should bring it up with the professor before the exam, not after the fact. I wouldn't consider it a trap because he specifically went over his policy in a previous class like you said. I really respect the prof/TA for sticking to his guns, whereas in my experience most profs/TAs are pathetically easy for students to walk over, and they take advantage of that.
This is peoples futures. Setting up arbitrary rules that has no effect other than failing people that try hard to show of what they've learnt is malicious bullshit. It goes against every fiber of what a teacher should be doing providing nothing but a oppertunity to bully. What if he had said "you can't use the word "and" " or the letter "S" for that matter. would it have been "Rules are rules" then? And yes asking someone to stop writing mid sentence is just as unreasonable as the above mentioned suggestion, it can make or break an entire essay if you're not allowed to round up. I think what is just isn't necessarily the question here. In a university classroom, the professor is basically the law. Just like a judge in the courthouse or an Admiral on a warship. It can be unfair and tyrannical but at least in this student's case, he had the option to 1. not go to university 2. not take that class 3. stop writing It may not be right (or "write," hehe) but it was the "malicious bullshit" rule. I think it's unfortunate and if I ran the classroom, I would not do that but in some environments, power is legitimately used in such a manner. No this is the mentality that needs to be washed out. If you behave in a unacceptable manner, then you are the problem. Not the ones forced upon people in the class room. No you don't have a choice because some classes are required for you to take to advance to the stuff you want to do. I hate it when people think they are just someone elses bitch for no reason. You pretty much never just have to take it up your backside. All rules should fill a purpose that can be explained to you within reason. For example, you can't use your phone. That's explainable within reason. If there were no students the schools would all die out, they are there for you no the other way around.
The flaw in your logic is the fact that you think this rule is arbitrary, when it is not. People are not allowed to continue completing a test past the expired time for one simple reason: it is not fair to everyone else in the class. If one person is able to finish the test with extra time, then he has an unfair advantage.
Give everyone extra time, you say? People will never have enough time. That's why the time limit is used, to imply some sort of urgency. This is not only necessary but also beneficial to one's future endeavors, because time is not infinite, and people should not be misled to think it is.
|
what I hated most was when the prof would say "pencils down" and I'd put my pencil down for fear of losing marks, and the guy beside me blatantly kept writing up until his exam was collected and wouldn't get penalized at all
|
On March 05 2011 09:55 Souma wrote:I used to share your exact same views, Hynda. But then I grew up and realized that the world did not run on my ideals. Maybe you will realize this some day, or maybe you will become a revolutionary figure ten years from now... who knows.
Perhaps it will comeback and bite me in the arse and I'll end up piss poor in the gutter with no friends, no hope and just end it all. Who knows. But at least my back will be clean.
|
On March 05 2011 10:27 Enervate wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 09:50 Hynda wrote:On March 05 2011 09:43 slyboogie wrote:On March 05 2011 09:30 Hynda wrote:
Rules are rules. If a student has a problem with the rule, he should bring it up with the professor before the exam, not after the fact. I wouldn't consider it a trap because he specifically went over his policy in a previous class like you said. I really respect the prof/TA for sticking to his guns, whereas in my experience most profs/TAs are pathetically easy for students to walk over, and they take advantage of that.
This is peoples futures. Setting up arbitrary rules that has no effect other than failing people that try hard to show of what they've learnt is malicious bullshit. It goes against every fiber of what a teacher should be doing providing nothing but a oppertunity to bully. What if he had said "you can't use the word "and" " or the letter "S" for that matter. would it have been "Rules are rules" then? And yes asking someone to stop writing mid sentence is just as unreasonable as the above mentioned suggestion, it can make or break an entire essay if you're not allowed to round up. I think what is just isn't necessarily the question here. In a university classroom, the professor is basically the law. Just like a judge in the courthouse or an Admiral on a warship. It can be unfair and tyrannical but at least in this student's case, he had the option to 1. not go to university 2. not take that class 3. stop writing It may not be right (or "write," hehe) but it was the "malicious bullshit" rule. I think it's unfortunate and if I ran the classroom, I would not do that but in some environments, power is legitimately used in such a manner. No this is the mentality that needs to be washed out. If you behave in a unacceptable manner, then you are the problem. Not the ones forced upon people in the class room. No you don't have a choice because some classes are required for you to take to advance to the stuff you want to do. I hate it when people think they are just someone elses bitch for no reason. You pretty much never just have to take it up your backside. All rules should fill a purpose that can be explained to you within reason. For example, you can't use your phone. That's explainable within reason. If there were no students the schools would all die out, they are there for you no the other way around. The flaw in your logic is the fact that you think this rule is arbitrary, when it is not. People are not allowed to continue completing a test past the expired time for one simple reason: it is not fair to everyone else in the class. If one person is able to finish the test with extra time, then he has an unfair advantage. Give everyone extra time, you say? People will never have enough time. That's why the time limit is used, to imply some sort of urgency. This is not only necessary but also beneficial to one's future endeavors, because time is not infinite, and people should not be misled to think it is.
I guess it's a matter of trust. In my classes when the time was up you were told to round of your paper and hand it in. People finished at different times. Obviously if someone had gone on for something that was blatantly not a round up I guess he would have been told to stop, however that never happend once.
|
This was definitely just poor judgement on the student's part; if the professor sets out rules, people should follow them no matter what the circumstances. I know it sounds rather dumb, but that's how I feel.
|
Maybe the time constraint was a bit harsh, but the student is an idiot if he's given proper warning and he still explicitly tries to go behind the professor's back and break the rules. It's essentially cheating the system.
|
Hynda, it is most definitely cheating. He's getting extra time that others are not, even if it is a few seconds. The prof. cracking down on him is justified because it is a higher learning institute where ethics are important and need to be reinforced. If he went unpunished it leads to him thinking that you can get away with breaking rules. In real life there are severe consequences for breaking rules and it is better for him to learn it now where it only results in a bad grade vs later in life where he might end up imprisoned or worse.
Example 1: He goes on to become an engineer. He has a deadline for 5 years down the line. He is 1 day late in finishing his design but that results in his company losing the patent or bid.
Example 2: He becomes a lawyer. He has a court date, he's 5 mins late. He is held in contempt of the court, imprisoned. Then because his client has to use a court assigned lawyer who doesn't know his case loses the case and is sentenced the death penalty.
Example 3: He becomes a stock trader. He is late to post vital info about a company which drives up energy costs in winter resulting in hundreds dying from lack of heating. He is absolved of responsibility because he was only "a little" late.
These are extreme cases but they show the importance of teachers not only teaching the material but also serving as role models and examples of how one should conduct themselves. This prof. and TA showed integrity in upholding their rule. The last example is the case in which the same principle you believe should be applied to the student is then applied to him as a professional.
|
Dude , professors like that ... didn't know they still existed
feels like the typical evil teacher from some movie (I've never had a teacher even near that kinda degree of "up-stuckness" )
|
Damn poor guy, he really should have stopped though so I can't fault the TA's for doing their job.
|
Yeah, you have to feel for the student. I still don't understand the hate for the professor, though. It sounds like he was pretty clear about both the rules and the consequences for breaking those rules.
Also I have to give a big +1 to:
On March 05 2011 09:49 Milkis wrote: As far as I know, keeping "arbitrary" rules and respecting other people's way of doing things is quite important in anything you end up doing.
|
Its all about discipline.
Rules are rules.
Sometimes in life certain values are more useful than actual knowledge.
That school/professor/TA might have been overdoing it,
but they warned the students right.
If others can do it why not the rest.
|
Reminds of that time that the one girl sitting behind me was harassing me for answers, then I sorta-half turned my head going 'No, leave me alone" and I was sent out of the class room because the rule was you couldn't talk.
Whee.
I don't like school.
|
On March 05 2011 10:48 Shanlan wrote:
Hynda, it is most definitely cheating. He's getting extra time that others are not, even if it is a few seconds. The prof. cracking down on him is justified because it is a higher learning institute where ethics are important and need to be reinforced. If he went unpunished it leads to him thinking that you can get away with breaking rules. In real life there are severe consequences for breaking rules and it is better for him to learn it now where it only results in a bad grade vs later in life where he might end up imprisoned or worse.
Example 1: He goes on to become an engineer. He has a deadline for 5 years down the line. He is 1 day late in finishing his design but that results in his company losing the patent or bid.
Example 2: He becomes a lawyer. He has a court date, he's 5 mins late. He is held in contempt of the court, imprisoned. Then because his client has to use a court assigned lawyer who doesn't know his case loses the case and is sentenced the death penalty.
Example 3: He becomes a stock trader. He is late to post vital info about a company which drives up energy costs in winter resulting in hundreds dying from lack of heating. He is absolved of responsibility because he was only "a little" late.
These are extreme cases but they show the importance of teachers not only teaching the material but also serving as role models and examples of how one should conduct themselves. This prof. and TA showed integrity in upholding their rule. The last example is the case in which the same principle you believe should be applied to the student is then applied to him as a professional.
I do see your point, I still don't agree with it. but I do see it. I like your examples but also i can't see them being applied in the real world. Engineers are always late, pretty much every single project gets pushed at least 2-3 weeks because it wasn't done as good as it can be. (My grandfather was a very well respected Engineer so I do know that for a fact). The second example seems like a very weird way to run a court, are you supposed to be clairvoiant as a lawyer? As for example 3 the guy would probably get a promotion within the company that drove up those prices for earning them the extra buck, go capitalism! I guess that's the only one I wouldn't see as valid.
I guess what I want to say is that in the real world everything like that is planned into scheduel. The Engineers will never set a deadline with just 1 day to spare. They will set the dead line one month earlier becuase they know that they will need time to fix it.
The lawyer will be not be more than a minute away because he knows he might just need that extra half hour if something happens.
And the stock guy will get PMs from his firm asking him why he hasn't done X yet.
That for me is the really world, yet for written exams you're supposed to just turbo everything down, and then suddenly stop. For me that doesn't represent how the real world works. It's alot less scary than the things you get taught at school. You are allowed to be late some times, you are allowed to miss things, you are allowed to panic and write that extra order that your company could probably lived without. It won't get you fired, because as long as you do a good job your misstakes will just a piss in the sea.
In the end I think it has to do with your surroundings as pretty much everything else. I was born into a world where things should be done right not fast. While the opposite seems true for you.
And as for being both right and fast, well if anyone managed that they would be ruling the world by now.
|
why does this have to be a discussion about great justice? why are you so defiant, that when your superior gives you a rule, that you would "most definitely break it," and if you couldn't get your way, you would go over his head? is this discussion rooted at all in what you actually would do, or are we talking what would be "fair" in a great cosmic sense?
and as far as rules and success all of that jazz, someone MUST fail school. Grades are not "A for effort," they are a way of categorizing your performance compared to others, so that in the future, people(employers) can get an understanding of your academic success and your potential for the future.
and as far as dying alone with your back clean, i associate this sentiment with youth and immaturity. its kind of a comic book-esque noble struggle, but one day you find something thats actually worth fighting for
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
