My professor has a very strict set of rules for writing exams. There is a clock that is displayed on the projector: the left side counts up (elapsed time) and the right side counts down (time remaining). When the time expires, a Windows Alert event occurs, and says "Time's up!" accompanied by the default alert sound.
At this point, my professor says "Stop writing please" twice. After the second time, if you continue to write, he (or one of the three TA's) will write a red "X" on your exam- it will not be marked. This policy was explained in -depth in a previous class.
So, my prof says "Stop writing please" once. I drop my pencil like it's on fire. There's no way I'm risking even looking like I'm writing for a 22% midterm. I see one guy, one row over to my right, frantically filling in a bubble on the Scantron. "Stop writing please." Time is most definitely over.
This guy looks to the left. <_<
Looks to the right. As if he is about to cross the road. >_>
Looks at the TA. The TA slowly turns his head away from where this guy is sitting.
O_O A window of opportunity! He pretends that he is lazily playing with his pencil, when in fact he is filling in his last bubble!
The TA snaps his head back. A clever trap! The head-fake is successful. The TA briskly walks over, scribbles a red "X" on his exam, and no words are exchanged. The examination is being handed in, but not marked. X_X
I feel bad for the guy. Not because he got a zero, but because he didn't have the judgment to be able to make the right decision.
Meh, I never liked timed exams of any kind. Some of my friends could get a 100% on every single test if they had enough time to work on it. Your Professor's system seems pretty ridiculous though. A 0 just for filling in one bubble after time is up on a 22% exam? Idk, most teachers/professors I know would simply take the paper away or mark off a few points.
I really don't see how a "trap" like this is going to further the goal of educating this student.
Will he have learned any more as a result of this? Will he understand the material better? Will any one in the class understand it better as a result of this?
I suppose the logic of this is that it needs to be 100% fair for every one! Nobody should get an extra two seconds!
It seems to me that this kind of thing is just... backwards.
What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
On March 05 2011 08:56 Kyuukyuu wrote: I have always wanted to do this (what the TA did).
Also, schadenfreude :\ I guess I'm just a stickler for rules like that.
Schadenfreude? :D I never knew about that one. I mean, the American language has borrowed some words from the german language (angst, mensch, kindergarden) but that made me laugh
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
The bad judgment is definitely the student's. If your prof was this strict, would you consider cheating? I'm not agreeing that the prof is right, but that's out of my hands. These are his rules. You play by them. I'm not about to contest that. The "right" decision doesn't refer to anything moral, it was just definitely the wrong decision to continue writing. This is the second test in this class and he was just as strict on the first. The rules were extremely clear. The prof even explained his method of testing for about twenty minutes in a previous lecture.
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.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
The bad judgment is definitely the student's. If your prof was this strict, would you consider cheating? I'm not agreeing that the prof is right, but that's out of my hands. These are his rules. You play by them. I'm not about to contest that. The "right" decision doesn't refer to anything moral, it was just definitely the wrong decision to continue writing. This is the second test in this class and he was just as strict on the first. The rules were extremely clear. The prof even explained his method of testing for about twenty minutes in a previous lecture.
It's not cheating, its rounding of your awnsers there is a whole world of difference. The fact that this professor abuses his powers is what's wrong. Just accepting it as a bad call from the students furthers this atrocious behaviour from the teacher.
It's not acceptable behaviour as a teacher. If I told I would punch you if you said the word "Dung" then it's still my fault if I punch you, because there was no reason.
Perhaps it's cultural diffrences but what level of education is this? It at least sounds like you're not kids anymore and he shouldn't be able to carry on like this. If he a 20 minute lecture on explaining a unfair, unreasonable and power abusing system then at least in any class I've been it would have been instantly contested. There is no reason other than power abuse for him to act the way he does, and the sad part is that it seems the students don't know their own power.
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.
Of course the student should have erred on the side of caution.
However, it's pretty clear that the professors primary goal is not to educate, but to power trip. The only thing this kid learned was "wow, this professor is pretty fucking strict."
Is the subject of this class how strict the professor is? This seems like a shallow avenue for intellectual investigation.
Perhaps education is a secondary goal for this professor.
What does this kind of practice have to do with actually learning course material?
When I was in school I almost ALWAYS finished exams first or second, and often with very high scores. I was uniquely good at taking tests and i took advantage of that. However, I didn't always 'actually' understand the material, I just understood how to take tests really well.
This policy rewards people like me when we already have the advantage.
I was done twenty minutes ago, I couldn't care less if this kid gets an extra ten seconds to bubble in his answer.
I was a TA for introductory History course and my prof had this rule where if any student was seen with a cell phone during an exam, he'd fail them. I thought the rule was a bit harsh and there was one situation where I made direct eye contact with a young man checking a text. I didn't walk over and fail him, though I probably should have.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
The bad judgment is definitely the student's. If your prof was this strict, would you consider cheating? I'm not agreeing that the prof is right, but that's out of my hands. These are his rules. You play by them. I'm not about to contest that. The "right" decision doesn't refer to anything moral, it was just definitely the wrong decision to continue writing. This is the second test in this class and he was just as strict on the first. The rules were extremely clear. The prof even explained his method of testing for about twenty minutes in a previous lecture.
It's not cheating, its rounding of your awnsers there is a whole world of difference. The fact that this professor abuses his powers is what's wrong. Just accepting it as a bad call from the students furthers this atrocious behaviour from the teacher.
It's not acceptable behaviour as a teacher. If I told I would punch you if you said the word "Dung" then it's still my fault if I punch you, because there was no reason.
Perhaps it's cultural diffrences but what level of education is this? It at least sounds like you're not kids anymore and he shouldn't be able to carry on like this. If he a 20 minute lecture on explaining a unfair, unreasonable and power abusing system then at least in any class I've been it would have been instantly contested. There is no reason other than power abuse for him to act the way he does, and the sad part is that it seems the students don't know their own power.
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. 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?
No, in that case the student should approach the professor and discuss the rules with him before taking the exam. The student in this case clearly understood and accepted the rules, and tried to circumvent them, also commonly known as cheating. He should count himself lucky that he wasn't reported to student conduct or academic integrity instead of just failing that one test.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
You are aware that the prof and the TA are two different people, right?
There are strict professors and there are kind professors. As you say, we're not kids anymore, which means you should be able to follow the set of rules a professor lays out for you, no questions asked.
If I told I would punch you if you said the word "Dung" then it's still my fault if I punch you, because there was no reason.
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?
The first example is illegal, while the rules the professor set up is not.
In your second example, if the professor tells you you can't use those words or letters, you don't. Now, I'm not going to say the professor is "right", because in reality that is really strict. But also in reality, you need to learn how to follow rules. If, in the future, your boss tells you to do something specific, you do it, no questions asked. This is preparation for that.
The Professor is partly at fault for being strict, yes, but the student is even more at fault for having been warned beforehand and not following instructions. If you are given a specific deadline, obey it, and don't think anyone is going to think twice about extending it just for you.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
You are aware that the prof and the TA are two different people, right?
Not at all, regardless, remove that part and replace it with TA then. And obviously any teacher that allows any "TA" (please do inform me what it stands for... Test Addentant perhaps? is just as much in the wrong.
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.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
The bad judgment is definitely the student's. If your prof was this strict, would you consider cheating? I'm not agreeing that the prof is right, but that's out of my hands. These are his rules. You play by them. I'm not about to contest that. The "right" decision doesn't refer to anything moral, it was just definitely the wrong decision to continue writing. This is the second test in this class and he was just as strict on the first. The rules were extremely clear. The prof even explained his method of testing for about twenty minutes in a previous lecture.
It's not cheating, its rounding of your awnsers there is a whole world of difference. The fact that this professor abuses his powers is what's wrong. Just accepting it as a bad call from the students furthers this atrocious behaviour from the teacher.
It's not acceptable behaviour as a teacher. If I told I would punch you if you said the word "Dung" then it's still my fault if I punch you, because there was no reason.
Perhaps it's cultural diffrences but what level of education is this? It at least sounds like you're not kids anymore and he shouldn't be able to carry on like this. If he a 20 minute lecture on explaining a unfair, unreasonable and power abusing system then at least in any class I've been it would have been instantly contested. There is no reason other than power abuse for him to act the way he does, and the sad part is that it seems the students don't know their own power.
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. 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?
No, in that case the student should approach the professor and discuss the rules with him before taking the exam. The student in this case clearly understood and accepted the rules, and tried to circumvent them, also commonly known as cheating. He should count himself lucky that he wasn't reported to student conduct or academic integrity instead of just failing that one test.
Sadly people are not robots. It's not cheating, it's something you do because the adrenaline is pumping and you want to show how good you are. There is no reason ever to discourage that. Regardless if you think of it as cheating however, it's still wrong. It contradicts everything that education stands for, I can accept that we have diffrent views on what you would consider cheating, but I could never ever accept that someone would get failed for something as minor as this.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
You are aware that the prof and the TA are two different people, right?
Not at all, regardless, remove that part and replace it with TA then. And obviously any teacher that allows any "TA" (please do inform me what it stands for... Test Addentant perhaps? is just as much in the wrong.
Teacher's assistant probably.
Yeah, I don't agree with that teacher, that's an very asshole-y way to conduct an exam. Very. It just frustrates people. If you do it "normaly" only a very small fraction of the students will take the extra extra time to write, and at that, not for long.
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.
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.
It is the kid's future, but honestly, remember it is the kid's decision to gamble on it, not the teacher's.
If you honestly think this is bullying then I really don't know what to say, but rules are rules and it was 100% the kid's decision -- Hell, the kid could go to the prof afterwards, say he was really sorry etc and just explain to him that he was panicking or something like that and work out something with the prof. Honestly, I really don't like your view of the world where you are allowed to break rules just because YOU find them arbitrary and not get punished for it (and of course, if you're punished it's just "bullying").
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.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
The bad judgment is definitely the student's. If your prof was this strict, would you consider cheating? I'm not agreeing that the prof is right, but that's out of my hands. These are his rules. You play by them. I'm not about to contest that. The "right" decision doesn't refer to anything moral, it was just definitely the wrong decision to continue writing. This is the second test in this class and he was just as strict on the first. The rules were extremely clear. The prof even explained his method of testing for about twenty minutes in a previous lecture.
It's not cheating, its rounding of your awnsers there is a whole world of difference. The fact that this professor abuses his powers is what's wrong. Just accepting it as a bad call from the students furthers this atrocious behaviour from the teacher.
It's not acceptable behaviour as a teacher. If I told I would punch you if you said the word "Dung" then it's still my fault if I punch you, because there was no reason.
Perhaps it's cultural diffrences but what level of education is this? It at least sounds like you're not kids anymore and he shouldn't be able to carry on like this. If he a 20 minute lecture on explaining a unfair, unreasonable and power abusing system then at least in any class I've been it would have been instantly contested. There is no reason other than power abuse for him to act the way he does, and the sad part is that it seems the students don't know their own power.
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. 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?
No, in that case the student should approach the professor and discuss the rules with him before taking the exam. The student in this case clearly understood and accepted the rules, and tried to circumvent them, also commonly known as cheating. He should count himself lucky that he wasn't reported to student conduct or academic integrity instead of just failing that one test.
Sadly people are not robots. It's not cheating, it's something you do because the adrenaline is pumping and you want to show how good you are. There is no reason ever to discourage that. Regardless if you think of it as cheating however, it's still wrong. It contradicts everything that education stands for, I can accept that we have diffrent views on what you would consider cheating, but I could never ever accept that someone would get failed for something as minor as this.
I'm not sure what is robotic about being able to stop filling out a scantron that has been counting down for the entire length of the test period, sounds an alarm, and then being told twice to put down your pencil. Part of getting an education is learning how to properly manage resources including time.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
The bad judgment is definitely the student's. If your prof was this strict, would you consider cheating? I'm not agreeing that the prof is right, but that's out of my hands. These are his rules. You play by them. I'm not about to contest that. The "right" decision doesn't refer to anything moral, it was just definitely the wrong decision to continue writing. This is the second test in this class and he was just as strict on the first. The rules were extremely clear. The prof even explained his method of testing for about twenty minutes in a previous lecture.
It's not cheating, its rounding of your awnsers there is a whole world of difference. The fact that this professor abuses his powers is what's wrong. Just accepting it as a bad call from the students furthers this atrocious behaviour from the teacher.
It's not acceptable behaviour as a teacher. If I told I would punch you if you said the word "Dung" then it's still my fault if I punch you, because there was no reason.
Perhaps it's cultural diffrences but what level of education is this? It at least sounds like you're not kids anymore and he shouldn't be able to carry on like this. If he a 20 minute lecture on explaining a unfair, unreasonable and power abusing system then at least in any class I've been it would have been instantly contested. There is no reason other than power abuse for him to act the way he does, and the sad part is that it seems the students don't know their own power.
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. 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?
No, in that case the student should approach the professor and discuss the rules with him before taking the exam. The student in this case clearly understood and accepted the rules, and tried to circumvent them, also commonly known as cheating. He should count himself lucky that he wasn't reported to student conduct or academic integrity instead of just failing that one test.
Sadly people are not robots. It's not cheating, it's something you do because the adrenaline is pumping and you want to show how good you are. There is no reason ever to discourage that. Regardless if you think of it as cheating however, it's still wrong. It contradicts everything that education stands for, I can accept that we have diffrent views on what you would consider cheating, but I could never ever accept that someone would get failed for something as minor as this.
I'm not sure what is robotic about being able to stop filling out a scantron that has been counting down for the entire length of the test period, sounds an alarm, and then being told twice to put down your pencil. Part of getting an education is learning how to properly manage resources including time.
indeed it is. Managing time is important, but having not flexibility about is counter productive it teaches you that what you actually do isn't important. Rounding of your paper won't save you if you havn't managed your time.
It's more about whether this kind of practice is beneficial to an educational environment in any way whatsoever.
Of course the kid should have observed the rule. Of course, the rule should not exist in the first place.
Those two things can co-exist rather reasonably.
The problem is that the kid has been punished severely for breaking his side of the bargain. The professor, on the other hand, will not be punished at all for fostering an educational environment which is not actually designed to educate.
1) There are rules. 3) The rules include a windows alert via timer and the words "Stop writing please" twice. If you are still writing at the end of the second saying, you get a Red X. 2) This rule is known to the class. 4) There is a punishment for breaking this rule. 5) The punishment is a red X that means your exam doesn't get graded. 6) The punishment is known to the class.
Seems pretty cut and dry to me. One thing I learned in college is that there are arbitrary stupid rules and one needs to follow them at times. This professor is teaching that lesson as well as the material.
If the situation was... 1) The professor did not clearly explain rules for taking the exam and punishments for going over the time. 2) The professor gave an exam and called time 3) A student finished answering one question momentarily after 4) The professor said "you get a zero" to the student.
I would STILL consider the professor in the right but I'd consider him a ****-face, avoid taking that professor ever again, highly recommend against them, and generally complain that "next time you should explain the rules and punishments very clearly. However, I would respect the teacher's call here. The teacher did say "stop writing" and the student disobeyed.
There are dumb rules you must follow in school. There are dumb rules you must follow in life. When the punishments are clearly explained... weigh the consequences before breaking the rules. It's your own fault for breaking a clearly explained and defined rule with an explicit punishment.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It is the kid's future, but honestly, remember it is the kid's decision to gamble on it, not the teacher's.
If you honestly think this is bullying then I really don't know what to say, but rules are rules and it was 100% the kid's decision -- Hell, the kid could go to the prof afterwards, say he was really sorry etc and just explain to him that he was panicking or something like that and work out something with the prof. Honestly, I really don't like your view of the world where you are allowed to break rules just because YOU find them arbitrary and not get punished for it (and of course, if you're punished it's just "bullying").
Tough shit.
Yep every decision against me is bullying, ofcourse it is, I am a perfect human being and no rules apply to me. I wake up every single day thinking "Oh what a great day to be me, because I'm so fucking awesome". Only to realise later that the world is keeping me down with their silly rules, fight the machine! In secret I oppose everything and everyone, I am true anarchy.
I would also like to add that stupid and arbitrary rules can be used by anyone. I read my college "rule book" cover to cover twice. I was told I couldn't do a lot of things in college. I waved their "rule book" back at them and did them anyway. The rules changed the following year.
The point of a test is to see if you understand the material well enough. The student apparently didn't as he couldn't complete the exam in the time provided (assuming the test was relatively fair). If the professor explained the rules, then the student is really the only person at fault. I'm glad most of my professors would probably only take off points though. Sucks for a midterm
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.
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:
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.
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.
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]
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.
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" )
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.
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.
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.
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
On March 05 2011 11:12 gods_basement wrote: 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
It has nothing to do with great justice, it isn't about justice in any form. It's simply what I believe in. And yes it is rooted in what I do, I have whenever I felt that I couldn't get a satisfactory awnser gone over the teachers head, did it do much good? For me it did, I got a grade changed from a fail to an "A" due to what I felt was a ridiculous rule and they agreed with me. Have I been completly ignored, indeed I have. Do I go on crusades on a regular basis over the slightest thing? No I don't.
As far as who should fail school, those that can't perform should. Those that are not suited should. There are people that are brilliant at what they do but have a strong compulsion to finish their work, and yes sometimes you have time restraints, but they are never going to be on the minute unless you are into extremly specific work.
As for that part, I was pretty sure he was being ironic/sarcastic so I just spun on that. It was ment to sound like a Che kind of thing. To put your mind at ease I don't actually see myself like that, there is nothing noble in what I do. I do it based on my experiences with the real world and how much they differ from school. We all have our experiences, I got a great one from my education teaching me that the way schools work and the way real world works are vastly different, and that they prefered to teach us the real thing since that's the place where we would actually be.
I am in no way claiming that I am not biased as hell, and that my opinions have nothing to do with any kind of objective universal justice. As for fighting for something, probably but all people fight for something it's in our nature.
Being subject to rules does not free you from the responsiblity to judge their morality. You cannot use "well I did not make the rule" as an excuse to not have to worry about whether or not it is right or wrong. You cannot pretend like this class is some kind of isolated island and that once its rules are established it is free from any connection to the greater principles of right and wrong that exist in the rest of the world and society. Let me offer a different situation: The professor is the dictator of a tyrannical state. Reading newspapers is forbidden. The TA is a police officer. The student is standing next to a newsstand. The police officer pretends to look away, in that moment the student tries to quickly grab a newspaper and hide it under his jacket. However the Police Officer turns his head, goes "aha!", and shoots the student on the spot. Are you going to defend this as right? The student knew the rules, knew the risks.
Perhaps some are going to say this is a completely different situation, but it's not. The difference is in your moral judgement of shooting someone versus failing them on a test. And in your moral judgement of the legitimacy of the professor in both cases. In both cases the student is being harmed. You can say the Professor has the legitimacy to set these rules. You can say that the TA is morally correct to flunk a student. However it is simply nonsense to claim that the "rules are rules" and that you should not be allowed to pass judgement on them.
For what it's worth, I think the professor is completely out of bounds by setting these rules. However there's not much the student can do. If he was going to complain about the system he should've done so before the test began, and if he wasn't going to complain then he can't change his mind once he's gotten caught. In the end though it doesn't really matter. If the professor feels that this method teaches his students something important, then that is the responsiblity of himself and of the institution that pays him money to teach students said lesson. However I agree mostly with Hynda, the goal should be to try and get the most out of every student, not to enforce strict compliance to arbritray deadlines.
Look at game developing. The most succesfull companies (*cough*Blizzard*cough*) are the ones that put creating the highest quality product above and beyond any fidelity to deadlines. Your professor is teaching his students to be 3rd rate developers who rush products out the door to meet a deadline, leading into buggy poorly received products that flop upon release. I, and I believe Hynda to, are saying he should be teaching them to focus on producing products that will be of high standards of quality, even if it means stretching and being flexible with deadlines, so that they will produce products that are succesfull and benefit their company and (depending on the field they're working in) society in general.
I don't know how anyone is arguing for trying to squeeze in marks by cheating. You don't hand in an assignment late expecting a full grade, and you don't take a test thinking of going past the allotted time to squeeze in marks. These rules are there for a good reason. It sucks that it happened but this guy was warned thoroughly about it. The fact that he did it despite the clear warnings is really just stupid. I can't pity his situation at all.
A lot of people seems to have missed the point of the rule.
Whether or not the professor set and abide by such a strict rule because he was "on a power trip" or was a "dictator" is not really important. Nor is discussing whether exams are best for student's learning, as that's a completely different issue. Furthermore, people are discussing the morality of these rules?
Here's something that's immoral: a student that continues to write when the exam time is up, when everyone else has stopped. This student is taking advantage of the fact that the professor does not penalize him for having an advantage over other people. How would you feel is the kid next to you get an extra 5 minutes for every exam, or extra week to work on his assignments for no penalty?
The rules that were set up and abided to in this case were able to stop this kind of behaviour. The kid in this case wasn't even finishing the last sentence on an essay question - he was filling in bubbles for a multiple choice, so it's not even like he was rounding off what he was doing. The rules did their job and I personally applaud the examiners for doing what they did.
Now, there might be a legitimate discussion on whether the penalty was too severe. Personally I do not think so, as I consider writing after the time is up cheating just the same way as bringing in unauthorized materials - they both give advantages to a particular student over others, and should be punished accordingly.
There's nothing immoral about his decision to keep writing. In this situation the only possible victim here is the student. Rules are rules they don't mean anything with regards to morality... also the choice to break the rules is available to every student there is no unfair advantage, if a student takes the risk and executes accordingly he will be rewarded as is the case of all things in life. Rules may serve a function but breaking rules by itself is not inherently immoral. As for the professor it seems he likes to prepare his students for the real world by being strict as possible which is fine.
I completely do not udnerstand how the argument of "working to their highest potential" even matters.
I for one have had professors of all types, both strict and relatively more lenient. Regardless, you cannot really apply in the context of an exam that it is meant for students to reach their full potential. This world is naturally filled with deadlines. Without them nothing would be ever set and objectives would never be completely reached. We set deadlines to ensure their completion.
An exam to some extent is a harsher form of a deadline. You know you must study for an exam up to the exam time. You only have a certain amount of time to work to your highest potential. You are allotted a reasonable time (considering everyone has the same time). Exams are not something to make it so that we can reach an ideal potential, because we can all reach some ideal potential when given time. Exams are meant to test your ability to learn and apply the material as efficiently as possible (thats the whole point of a test). There are some things that deadlines must be kept, just like there are moments in life where you have to produce results. If you cannot produce results in the given time, then you simply are not at a level where others can do so. This has how the university has weeded out the weak for a long time now.
This isn't to say that I don't feel bad for the guy. However, in a world of rules, and a university meant to put students under pressure, the best produce the greatest results in their given time while the weaker ones dont. If he cannot finish an exam in the alloted time, he simply does not have the capabilities to be a higher end student and should be catagorized as such. The professor is just using the rule to ensure fairness and weed out the weak students, which by all means is the way to go.
On March 05 2011 10:29 Gak2 wrote: 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
Just wanted to say that I agree with this. The feeling sucks when you know you could have fixed something but you didn't stop in fear of not wanting to get failed (like in my example)
To answer some general questions I saw while skimming replies: This is a fourth year university class. TA = Teacher's Assistant. They mark assignments and administer exams. There are three of them, all of which have probably enforced this policy between the two (so far) tests. The professor in question is actually conducting a study on the quality standards of university classes- so he's super strict, but very helpful as a professor. He has a policy in which he will answer all questions within 24 hours, not a bad guy by any means. There are about 150 people in the class, and it is curved. That means that the average is around a B/B+ (3.2/4.0) and it goes from there. I'm pretty sure he will be failed. Looking at the first test, there were 5/150 students who received 0-5% on the exam. The rest of the distribution follows a reasonable bell curve. All the students enrolled in the class attended. The exam was multiple choice with 5 choices, so 0-5% means 0-1 /20 questions correct. My assumption is that anybody in this range of marks was likely disqualified for one reason or another. This is an engineering class. By the code of ethics of the school and the code of ethics of our provincial engineering board, we MUST uphold ethical standards. I think that the rule is a bit harsh, but having a quantifiable border on rules is much better than a wishy-washy grey area. What upsets me is the fact that this student, in full knowledge of the rules, cheated. That is undeniable, whether the rules set in place are realistic or not.
And I kind of see Hynda's point. I've always felt that written examinations are one of the worst ways to measure one's intelligence. However, it's logistically impossible to do virtually anything else.
lol I just thought the story was anecdotal with the TA head-fake, but looks like we got some good discussion about it.
On March 05 2011 09:10 SpicyCrab wrote: I really don't see how a "trap" like this is going to further the goal of educating this student.
Will he have learned any more as a result of this? Will he understand the material better? Will any one in the class understand it better as a result of this?
I suppose the logic of this is that it needs to be 100% fair for every one! Nobody should get an extra two seconds!
It seems to me that this kind of thing is just... backwards.
i don't know what you mean. there's no pedagogical technique that's relevant in the context of dealing with a cheating student. school is a business that will break down if cheaters aren't actively pursued and punished. if the goal is to teach him it's the right course of action to first teach him to not cheat.
more importantly say this guy uses that extra time to get a better mark than someone else who stopped on time, who otherwise would have gotten a better mark. what if both of them applied to the same grad school and with one spot left, it came down to who had the better grade, well then that's just bullshit. we can be idealists and talk about the best way to teach someone, but let's get real.
When I TA, I always tell my students that if they hand in their assignments one minute late (by uoft standard, that's actually about 11 minutes late), they will receive a 50% reduction in their grades. So, when someone hands in their work late, I will always make a note on that and say it's 50% reduction. In reality, I only write that they lost 50% - I record their grades as if it was handed in on time.
The point of the 'rule' is to make sure the students hand in their work on time, not to make someone's life miserable. This is why I don't actually penalize people who are occasionally late.
In high schools it's becoming very difficult for teachers to enforce rules and prevent cheating. If you see a student cheating you better have video evidence, notarized statements from three witnesses, and a successful polygraph before you attempt to penalize the student. Otherwise, the parent will be down your throat, you will be abandoned by your superiors, and you will end up looking like the asshole. Even if you do manage to make your case successfully the kid will get a slap on the wrist as everyone's hands are tied.
This is of course trickling into college/university. Lots of kids think they can do whatever they want, even in a college class. Some professors are very up front about their rules and expectations. These rules and expectations should be approved by the institution, in general. If they are, then students must follow them... even if it means getting a 0 when you bubble after the 'stop time.'
There was a thread recently where a majority of tl users pointed out that they are okay with cheating on academic tests/etc. This is in a community of higher-than-average academic performers (or so I'd believe).
If you want to make the claim 'strictly timed tests are a poor measurement tool in education' then you definitely can. However, you chose to go to an institution which is obviously 'okay' with strictly timed tests. If you think the way that institution is doing things is stupid then go somewhere else. Now the problem of course is that most college classes have strictly timed tests. This is a VALID complaint but also not really relevant to the specific case in the OP.
I have a couple of students who can't seem to perform well on timed tests. Things that they understood a moment ago they can't seem to demonstrate on a test question... and they get it wrong. Most likely their vocational aspirations do not include "taking timed written tests on this topic" so it's not the most fair way to compare them to their classmate whose brain works differently such that they generally do well on tests... at least as well as they did in activities while learning the material. Actually it's pretty freaking amazing how much difficulty some students have with tests. This along with other weaknesses students show depending on circumstances lead me to a daily mental thought of "OMG I DIDN'T KNOW SUCH STUPIDITY COULD EXIST IN THE UNIVERSE" but it's really just the nature of the beast I guess.
Moral of the story: If a hard-ass professor tells you not to bubble after time is up, DO NOT BUBBLE AFTER TIME IS UP. If he says he is going to fail you, assume he will fail you. If you don't like his pedagogy... well.... what percentage of college professors have good pedagogy? If the professor's biggest fault is that he won't accommodate people that don't follow his instructions, you are actually in pretty good shape in the grand scheme of things.
Let's face it, society works because of rules. If every one felt like this guy EVERYONE would keep writing beyond the time limit. He's basically taking advantage of the fact that others are following the rules.
In Canada we've had a huge problem with cheating in Universities. You can imagine how something like this must have started. One student cheated. Others began to think why should the student that cheated get such an unfair advantage especially when such actions can be rewarded after graduation in the form of jobs and status. That's when it becomes a big problem.
But anyways, it reminds me of a time when one of my profs was handing out a test, he explicitly said, "Do not start until I tell you to" He saw some dude starting on the test when he got it, and then failed him on the spot.
People who start early/finish late always pisses me off, since ideally test conditions are supposed to be the same for everyone. But when people do that, visibly in front of your faces, you definitely feel cheated.
I mean you could be like, how does this relate to education or anything? Maybe not, but on the other hand, he is cheating other students out of their respective times. Perhaps it's not so much a lesson about time management as much as don't freakin cheat others.
In any case, the professor set the rules before hand. If the rules are that arbitrary, or stupid, then you take it up with the professor before the test is set. Otherwise, you implicitly agree to the rules that he has set, and thus any penalty given shouldn't come as a surprise or seen as harsh.
As a side note, I feel like most professors are pretty good about setting a correct test length. Even for the long tests, it wasn't about how FAST you were thinking, but rather how WELL you understood the material. If you weren't comfortable with the material, then of course you were going to take a longer time, and do worse. Most of the solutions for any test weren't particularly long or take a lot of calculations to do, but rather just figuring out the correct approach, in which being comfortable with the material helps a lot more than just thinking fast. Although I do agree that written tests aren't exactly the best way to assess someone's knowledge, it's not like they aren't so terrible that they don't either.
It isn't mere 'rounding out' or completing an answer when he had 3-4 notifications at that point that time was up. The kid quite obviously measured risk to reward, and thought the chances were good for him.
On March 05 2011 14:19 micronesia wrote: In high schools it's becoming very difficult for teachers to enforce rules and prevent cheating. If you see a student cheating you better have video evidence, notarized statements from three witnesses, and a successful polygraph before you attempt to penalize the student. Otherwise, the parent will be down your throat, you will be abandoned by your superiors, and you will end up looking like the asshole. Even if you do manage to make your case successfully the kid will get a slap on the wrist as everyone's hands are tied.
This is of course trickling into college/university. Lots of kids think they can do whatever they want, even in a college class. Some professors are very up front about their rules and expectations. These rules and expectations should be approved by the institution, in general. If they are, then students must follow them... even if it means getting a 0 when you bubble after the 'stop time.'
There was a thread recently where a majority of tl users pointed out that they are okay with cheating on academic tests/etc. This is in a community of higher-than-average academic performers (or so I'd believe).
If you want to make the claim 'strictly timed tests are a poor measurement tool in education' then you definitely can. However, you chose to go to an institution which is obviously 'okay' with strictly timed tests. If you think the way that institution is doing things is stupid then go somewhere else. Now the problem of course is that most college classes have strictly timed tests. This is a VALID complaint but also not really relevant to the specific case in the OP.
I have a couple of students who can't seem to perform well on timed tests. Things that they understood a moment ago they can't seem to demonstrate on a test question... and they get it wrong. Most likely their vocational aspirations do not include "taking timed written tests on this topic" so it's not the most fair way to compare them to their classmate whose brain works differently such that they generally do well on tests... at least as well as they did in activities while learning the material. Actually it's pretty freaking amazing how much difficulty some students have with tests. This along with other weaknesses students show depending on circumstances lead me to a daily mental thought of "OMG I DIDN'T KNOW SUCH STUPIDITY COULD EXIST IN THE UNIVERSE" but it's really just the nature of the beast I guess.
Moral of the story: If a hard-ass professor tells you not to bubble after time is up, DO NOT BUBBLE AFTER TIME IS UP. If he says he is going to fail you, assume he will fail you. If you don't like his pedagogy... well.... what percentage of college professors have good pedagogy? If the professor's biggest fault is that he won't accommodate people that don't follow his instructions, you are actually in pretty good shape in the grand scheme of things.
Back when i was in high school, cheating did occur and top students did it. I was not happy because I didn't cheat
I think this is an example of one of those "extra-curricular" things that you're supposed to learn at school that people might miss out on if they're home schooled, along with "social skills" and whatnot. Personally, I see the value in evaluating how serious your boss is on an apparently arbitrary rule, as well as the value of playing by the rules you've agreed to.
Having TAed exams before, I would appreciate a rule like this. What ends up happening is at least one student will always keep going on way after time, and they generally are given entirely too much time to begin with... but no one wants to be the jerk who brings the hammer down.
And all the TAs have lives and have already wasted an hour or two of their time proctoring an exam they probably don't give a flip about (and then have to grade it in all likelihood), and then there's this one student stretching it out even more.
Frankly if you're not good enough to complete the exam in the given time, then maybe you should have been better with the course material. Trying to make the exam easier by squeezing extra time out of it is not fair.
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.
Why not at least investigate whether or not cheating took place. We don't take a zero tolerance policy on anything else. School allow children to eat candy even though many elicit drugs look quite similar to certain types of candy. Why would this seem unreasonable: A kid gets expelled for possessing loose pez candy. Is it unreasonable for me to say: "There are so many ways to traffic drugs in middle schools if you allow this in any form. I 100% agree on no-tolerance there."
Given how students are getting more and more of this sense of entitlement, I think actually enforcing rules is a good thing. Lord knows how many students bring up complaints (@ uni level) about wanting a grade to be bumped from a B to an A because their "future is on the line" and because these tests/classes "don't properly gauge their intelligence." It's ridiculous. It may not gauge your intelligence but it certainly gauges your discipline.
On one hand I can sort of understand Hynda's point about it not measuring intelligence but amazingly, school isn't all about that, it's also about your ability to complete a given task under the cards you've been dealt. Some of these kids are gonna get a job one day and be late on an assignment and be absolutely bewildered when they don't get a free pass. I think that's a wonderful rule by the teacher, and I honestly hope the school backs the teacher. Unfortunately, money tends to win out in a lot of cases and there's a high likelihood of the uni backing the student if a complaint is filed.
On March 05 2011 09:24 elmizzt 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.
It's as simple as that
dont do the crime if you cant do the time or whatevs~
on another note, when did the PC brigade make coin the logic behind 'bad test takers aren't necessarily worse students'
It doesn't mean the kid is retarded, but why does everyone pretend that the inability to do something in a timely fashion isn't a big red flag? The speed at which you do a task is just as important in the real world as the accuracy
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.
Why not at least investigate whether or not cheating took place. We don't take a zero tolerance policy on anything else. School allow children to eat candy even though many elicit drugs look quite similar to certain types of candy. Why would this seem unreasonable: A kid gets expelled for possessing loose pez candy. Is it unreasonable for me to say: "There are so many ways to traffic drugs in middle schools if you allow this in any form. I 100% agree on no-tolerance there."
how are you going to investigate whether cheating took place? you film everyone? get a proctor for every few students? or are you going to take the word of a student who talks to another person taking the test that 'no, i just wanted the eraser'? this is also why the pez example is irrelevant.
On March 06 2011 06:02 sikyon wrote: Frankly if you're not good enough to complete the exam in the given time, then maybe you should have been better with the course material. Trying to make the exam easier by squeezing extra time out of it is not fair.
err... I've taken exams that were specifically designed by the professor to not be finishable in the time allotted. This, unfortunately, happens a lot in engineering courses :/
I see this more as the student's failure at basic test taking. You pace yourself, try not to spend too long on one problem, and when time is almost up just start filling in random blanks to finish the scantron.
Things like this have always been a pet peeve. Even in grad school the teacher calls time and people will write for an extra minute or two. It's a bit different since none of the tests are multiple choice, but it's disobeying the test-taking protocols. Most teachers don't care too much, but I'm glad this one did.
I would like to teach some day and will definitely be hard on students who try to squeeze out that little extra time.
While you're discussing cheating, can you tell me if people really try to avoid you if they saw you cheating? A friend of mine has told me that this is what happens in western countries, but I doubt it.
That's bullshit. I've been in similar situations, a professor or TA should not have the ability to completely take away your marks for a whole exam just because a few extra words were written. School is for learning, not being a dick and potentially messing up someones life and adding additional stress to a most likely already stressed out person.
On March 08 2011 09:32 Southlight wrote: Yes, he learned that when he's given directions that have been explained many times in much detail and with much effort, he better follow them.
Pretty much. It makes you wonder how old some of the people responding are
This rule is so, so, so standard. Times up, you stop writing. End of story. The exam begins by the professors clock, and ends the same way. Not by the clock on your wrist, or mine, or the sneaky hothead students to your right.
It's not the military like some of you think it to be, it's just a damn test. And if you can't follow simple rules that are emphasized and repeated to you, then take your test back and hit the road with your 0%.
On March 05 2011 09:17 Hynda wrote: What a complete asshat. If he had done that on any of the places I've studied at he would have been fired in an instant. Wanting to finish something you've really worked hard for to show ambition to get the absolute most out of your work, is not something that should be punished for. There is no line of work were you will ask to not round something up or take time to finish it, none. You're not going to leave work the moment the clock hits 5 if you are in the middle of a meeting. You don't see articles in papers that just end mid word. It doesn't happen.
This guy is a bully and c**t, he actually wants people to fail, he sets up traps for people to fail so that he can bully them some more. As a teacher you want your students to succed ALWAYS, you never ever want them to fail. If you have a system where you end it on a specific time without letting your students round of their awnsers then you are the problem. The fact that you can fail someone for trying his best is beyond me.
The only bad judgement in this thread is yours for thinking that the professor had any right to act the way he did, and the schools for letting the bastard keep his job.
Not sure where you have been studying then, i studied at Chalmers in Gothenburg and there are some teachers who could have pulled a thing like this. The teacher sets the rules, as a student you follow them, if it was explained in detail beforehand i do not think any school would think twice about a teacher enforcing a rule like this on a Uni level in sweden.
But more common for us was pencils on the desk at the end of time while TA's begin collecting them, in some engineering classes they took away the sheet with the questions on and let the students keep working on thier answers.
Locking the class room the second a test starts is another hardcore rule like that, and while most tests/teachers where fine with you coming a few min late i had one teacher who was a stickler for time and always locked the classroom the second class/test starts or a break is over. People getting all thier stuff, clothes and even cellphones and wallets locked in the classroom for 45 minutes because they came back one minute late from a break meant nothing to this teacher.
Some of the best teachers i have had was really hard with thier rules, the "time-nazi" in particular. His classes was always the calmest ones and he always stayed after class to answer questions and held extra help-classes for thoose having trouble keeping up.
So yeah, the student knew the risk and should have followed the rule really. It is not really a strange rule either, classes is not only about teaching a subject it is also about preparing for work. Working with a deadline is actually quite common and many newly graduated students have trouble keeping the pace and dealing with the time pressure when they start working (strictly from my own experiences/observations), so i can understand a teacher wanting to enforce a rule like this.
And at least in sweden retaking a test is not a huge a deal...
I'm just curious, would the people that bitch about the time frame violations being unfair do the same if they got caught cheating in the same fashion on the SAT, LSAT, MCATs or whatever
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.
Why not at least investigate whether or not cheating took place. We don't take a zero tolerance policy on anything else. School allow children to eat candy even though many elicit drugs look quite similar to certain types of candy. Why would this seem unreasonable: A kid gets expelled for possessing loose pez candy. Is it unreasonable for me to say: "There are so many ways to traffic drugs in middle schools if you allow this in any form. I 100% agree on no-tolerance there."
how are you going to investigate whether cheating took place? you film everyone? get a proctor for every few students? or are you going to take the word of a student who talks to another person taking the test that 'no, i just wanted the eraser'? this is also why the pez example is irrelevant.
Depends on the test I guess. At my college when they suspected a student of cheating they interviewed them about their though process for a bunch of questions. This is actually remarkably accurate, cheaters don't know how they got to an answer whereas the people who did work tend to know how they got an answer. This is also why it's useful to collect scrap work from an exam so you can see what they wrote down in case this comes up.
I'm not saying in every case you can after the fact do something, but it doesn't mean you can't prepare to deal with things in a reasonable way. Just because we have laws and rules that people are aware of doesn't mean any punishment is justified.