Interesting blog discussion on enforcing exam word limits
| Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Self-absorbed racy university | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Zombie-like thriller library | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Zombie-like thriller library | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Zombie-like thriller library | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Zombie-like thriller library | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Self-absorbed racy university | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | Self-absorbed racy university | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Pontificating avocado mental disorder | 12/19/06 | | Odious stock car kitchen | 12/19/06 | | Ungodly Provocative School | 12/19/06 | | Ivory curious home | 12/19/06 | | Self-absorbed racy university | 12/19/06 | | arousing magical hunting ground | 12/19/06 | | motley ruby haunted graveyard abode | 12/19/06 | | Self-absorbed racy university | 12/19/06 | | flushed big-titted messiness | 12/19/06 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:32 AM Author: arousing magical hunting ground
1. I don't see how.
2. I don't see why that would even be a problem.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256111) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:34 AM Author: Ivory curious home
Well, if you know the prof will stop reading at word 250, you can write a self-contained 250 word answer, and then throw in a few other paragraphs that go into the less important issues that you couldn't fit in 250 words.
If the prof enforces the word limit and stops reading at wod 250, you're no worse off than you were before.
If the prof disregards the word limit or doesn't cut off the grading exactly at word 250, you just gained a windfall.
It seems that the proper way to do it is to cut off off reading at 250 words, and in addition to that impose a penalty for not following the rules.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256125) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:36 AM Author: Pontificating avocado mental disorder
"Well, if you know the prof will stop reading at word 250, you can write a self-contained 250 word answer, and then throw in a few other paragraphs that go into the less important issues that you couldn't fit in 250 words."
How is this beneficial? The less important issues don't get read and time wasted.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256138) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:54 AM Author: Self-absorbed racy university
Students don't know whether GTO's penalty will be enforced either. That's why GTO's argument makes so little sense. He seems to think it's ok to claim uncertainty with respect to the cut-off, but it's not ok to claim uncertainty with the imposition of a penalty.
There's abso-fucking-lutely no reaason to think that's a reasonable conclusion.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256214) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:39 AM Author: Ivory curious home
Well, if it's a 24 hour takehome you have a shitload of time at your disposal to waste.
Also you're assuming that the prof will stop at word 250. As mentioned in the comments to that blog post, not all profs actually do that. Basically, by going over the word limit you lose nothing at worst and get a windfall at best.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256149) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:43 AM Author: Ivory curious home
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying here. I'm writing from the student's perspective, not the prof's. If the student knows the only punishment a prof will give for going over the word limit is not read the words after word #250, the student has a very strong incentive to break the rules and write an answer greater than 250 words.
Worst case scenario: student gains nothing and loses nothing, since the professor just stops reading after word 250.
Best case scenario: the prof ignores his own stated word limit, reads the whole ansewr (or reads past word 250), and the student gets a higher grade.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256170) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:49 AM Author: Ivory curious home
The stuff about not being announced in advance seems silly; the guy was warned about the word limit and chose to break it anyway, so he deserves a punishment.
It seems the best thing to do is to stop reading after the word limit, and then provide an additional penalty to discourage efficient breach.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256191) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:51 AM Author: arousing magical hunting ground
If there's no negative to them going over (from the profs standpoint), I'm not sure why there's a need to impose a penalty.
I think this was :D's point. Not imposing a penalty doesn't hurt this particular prof, but may hurt other profs (by making their systesm unfair if they choose to count over 250).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256197) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:53 AM Author: arousing magical hunting ground
Right, but it's not hurting this prof, it is only helping other profs.
See my edit.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256206) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:54 AM Author: Zombie-like thriller library
Well, then he has to do his own word count on every essay. Which he probably should do. Fuck. I hope my Energy Law prof doesn't do that.
Point is: he has to do a wordcount on everyone (or at least the essays that are anywhere close to the limit). If he only does a wordcount on obvious violators, that isn't fair. He's probably not going to take the time to do a wordcount on everyone.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256211) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:37 AM Author: arousing magical hunting ground
Well, you've answered 1, but haven't answered 2.
If the prof cuts off at 250, no harm no foul, unless you consider having the prof count words a harm. I assume this would be a problem regardless, though.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256142) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:52 AM Author: Self-absorbed racy university
"That would seem to encourage more rule breaking though."
Who cares? They can waste all the time they want.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256203) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:59 AM Author: Self-absorbed racy university
Take a position on this: There is certainty of rule enforcement (penalty or not).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256230)
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:25 AM Author: Odious stock car kitchen
wgwag
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256072) |
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:35 AM Author: Ungodly Provocative School
scroll to the last comment.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256133) |
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:45 AM Author: Self-absorbed racy university
"I would sometimes flaunt the rule."
FLOUT, you fucking retard.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256176) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:48 AM Author: motley ruby haunted graveyard abode
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/flaunt
"2 : to treat contemptuously <flaunted the rules -- Louis Untermeyer>"
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256189) |
|
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:51 AM Author: Self-absorbed racy university
"If you use it, however, you should be aware that many people will consider it a mistake."
Damn straight.
http://www.answers.com/flaunt&r=67
Usage Problem. To show contempt for; scorn.
...This usage is still widely seen as erroneous and is best avoided.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256198) |
Date: December 19th, 2006 2:54 AM Author: flushed big-titted messiness
That's not interesting at all.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548963&forum_id=2#7256213) |
|
|