Harsh grading or not? Argue with prof?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lagraaaange
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the fairness of grading in a Fourier series problem where a participant lost points for omitting a variable in the argument of a sine function. Participants explore the implications of this omission on grading, the criteria for point deductions, and the appropriateness of the grading practices employed by different professors.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether a 10% deduction for omitting an "x" is excessive, suggesting that it may depend on the context of the problem.
  • Another participant argues that if the omission led to a final answer of zero, it could justify the point deduction, emphasizing the importance of including all variables in mathematical expressions.
  • Some participants note that grading practices vary among professors, with some assigning partial credit for correct work despite minor errors, while others may deduct points more harshly for such omissions.
  • A suggestion is made to discuss the issue with the professor during office hours to gain clarity and feedback without being confrontational.
  • Several participants express that the omission of the variable fundamentally alters the nature of the answer, making it difficult to award full points.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the fairness of the grading. Some believe the deduction is justified based on the importance of including the variable, while others feel it may be too harsh without additional context. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the appropriateness of the grading in this specific case.

Contextual Notes

The discussion lacks specific details about the full problem statement and the grading rubric used by the professor, which may influence the assessment of the situation.

Lagraaaange
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
I lost 10% or half of the points for a Fourier series problem because I forgot to include an "x" into argument of sin (pi). Is it just me or is this an excessive deduction of points?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems a little harsh. Did you include it in future calculations correctly? Was it the final answer?

If it was your final answer, you really have no case there. They're two separate answers.

That said, many of my professors assign points for each part of the problem, so that em getting everything correct but entering it into the calculator wrong would be only 1 point off or so. Different professors have different rules, though, and unless it was exorbitantly unfair or you really got it right, it's hard to argue for more points.
 
Without the full question it's hard for anyone to make a call on whether something was harsh grading or not. Omitting a variable in a function like that is obviously going to make something into a zero, and so it's possible that the consequence of that, even if carried through correctly put you into a situation where you didn't have to deal with about half of the problem - at least from a mark allotment point of view.

The way to deal with something like this is to go in during office hours and simply ask the professor to explain what you missed. This helps you to learn from the mistake and allows you to open a dialogue about the problem without challenging or arguing with the prof. (Often, students who come in with a confrontational attitude are met with a stonewall.)
 
Lagraaaange said:
I lost 10% or half of the points for a Fourier series problem because I forgot to include an "x" into argument of sin (pi). Is it just me or is this an excessive deduction of points?
How do you figure that 10% is half the points?

Without x, ##\sin(\pi) = 0##. Without seeing your work, it's hard to tell if the points deducted were excessive. Also, many instructors will give partial credit if they think you're on the right track, but a few give credit only when the answer is correct. Hard to say without more information.
 
Did you then simplify it to zero? I would have taken more points off for that.
 
Its was an expression for a sawtooth wave. I did all the work right but then forgot to add the x in the definition of a Fourier Series: I had the Bn coefficient but forgot the x in sin(npix)
 
Lagraaaange said:
Its was an expression for a sawtooth wave. I did all the work right but then forgot to add the x in the definition of a Fourier Series: I had the Bn coefficient but forgot the x in sin(npix)

But was it just a writing error - that is, did you include it on the next line? Or did you simplify the whole thing to zero? Because if the latter is the case, then you absolutely made a huge mistake and losing 50% isn't unreasonable.
 
Seems fair to me.
 
I agree with Micromass. You were asked for a function of x. You didn't write a function of x. Hard to get a lot of points in that situation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
202K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K