Is the marking system for exams fair in different universities worldwide?

[Physicist]

Hello everybody

I would like to know about the way of marking exams in different universities world wide.

At my university, if a question had many parts, a,b and c for example, which depends on each other and a student made a mistake in part a with b and c correct, this means that he will loose the marks for part a, b and c except he will take few marks for writing the formulas in b and c. I think this is unfair!

Also, if a student wrote the correct formula and substitute everything correct except one of the quantities, does this mean that he will loose the whole mark of the question?

Please let me know how thing are going on at your universities, especially for introductory physics.

Thank you

 

[scorpa]

It totally depends on how evil the prof is. In my experience so far usually if you screw up A but do B and C correctly even with the wrong number from A you will get full marks on B and C.

 

[George Jones]

For the situation that scorpa gave, I agree. Usually full marks awarded for B and C.

However, sometimes the situation is more subtle. For example consider a 10 mark 2-part question, where A is relatively easy and out of 3, and B is relatively hard and out of 7. Sometimes, making a mistake in A can change the hard question B into an easy question. Suppose Alice gets A perfect, but flounders a bit on B and gets 4 out of 7. Ted screws up A, and, in the process, turns B into an easy question, which he gets perfect.

Is it fair to Alice, who made a valiant attempt at answering the hard question, to award Ted 7 out 7 for the easy question that he answered?

I have have seen this happen, i.e., hard questions turning intgo easy questions because of mistake made in previous parts.

This makes the marker's task very difficult. Shades of grey and all that.

Regards,
George

 

[mathwonk]

forgive me for being blunt, but honestly this is a stupid discussion. marks do not mean anything. they are a trick to get us to learn the material.

giving low marks is not evil or mean, it is holding the bar higher.

The tougher your teacher is the luckier you are. that is why paris island is tough, so the marines will more liklely survive afterwards.

i apologize again for my bluntness but this is really true. take it to heart and you will greatly benefit. only weak students are afraid of getting low marks.

learn the material, and forget about the marks. they will take care of themselves.

 

[leright]

forgive me for being blunt, but honestly this is a stupid discussion. marks do not mean anything. they are a trick to get us to learn the material.

giving low marks is not evil or mean, it is holding the bar higher.

The tougher your teacher is the luckier you are. that is why paris island is tough, so the marines will more liklely survive afterwards.

i apologize again for my bluntness but this is really true. take it to heart and you will greatly benefit. only weak students are afraid of getting low marks.

learn the material, and forget about the marks. they will take care of themselves.

but if you don't get the marks, then you don't get to a good grad school, regardless of how well you truly learned the material.

 

[JasonRox]

forgive me for being blunt, but honestly this is a stupid discussion. marks do not mean anything. they are a trick to get us to learn the material.

giving low marks is not evil or mean, it is holding the bar higher.

The tougher your teacher is the luckier you are. that is why paris island is tough, so the marines will more liklely survive afterwards.

i apologize again for my bluntness but this is really true. take it to heart and you will greatly benefit. only weak students are afraid of getting low marks.

learn the material, and forget about the marks. they will take care of themselves.

Yes, but the harder you are the more time students are wasting learning meaningless things that you want them to do. Like how it should be written and things that don't even apply to knowing material.

It also takes up all the time students would have to be creative and think about other things, and possibly explore other areas.

If all teachers were difficult and tough, I highly doubt mathematics would be where it is today or any subject for that matter.

 

[mathwonk]

i knew there would be objections, nonetheless, focusing on marks as opposed to learning is the basic weak student's hangup.

just ask, "what did i do, wrong and how can i improve?" never ask "why didn't you give me more points?"

that question marks you as a whiner at best, a loser at worst.

if you want a good recommendation to grad school, it is better to be remembered as a curious motivated student, than a grade grubbing whiner.

 

[JasonRox]

i knew there would be objections, nonetheless, focusing on marks as opposed to learning is the basic weak student's hangup.

just ask, "what did i do, wrong and how can i improve?" never ask "why didn't you give me more points?"

that question marks you as a whiner at best, a loser at worst.

if you want a good recommendation to grad school, it is better to be remembered as a curious motivated student, than a grade grubbing whiner.

I do agree with that.

 

[George Jones]

As usual, some provocative and interesting comments.

With which I largely.

However, I don't know how to get rid of marks, and if marks are going to be given, then they should be given in a fair and consistent manner in a course.This, however, doesn't mean throwing marks at students.

learn the material, and forget about the marks. they will take care of themselves.

I couldn't agree more.

focusing on marks as opposed to learning is the basic weak student's hangup

When a student says, "But, I want and A!" I sometimes respond by quoting Mick and Keith,

"You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you just might find
You just might find
You get what you need"

Regards,
George

 

[matt grime]

Yes, but the harder you are the more time students are wasting learning meaningless things than you want them to do. Like how it should be written and things that don't even apply to knowing material.

I must disagree. A student who knows how to present the material in a coherent fashion usually understands it better. You learn by copying (see one do one teach one). You want to get good marks and understand the material properly? Copy out your lecture notes four times in ever more increasing neatness and you'll be amazed at what your brain remembers, and if you keep writing the same proofs out again and again you'll become a lot better at writing proofs yourself. The actual content of the vast majority of courses is not sufficiently intellectually challenging to to merit great thought. (This should be understood as not endorsing a teacher just giving lots of examples, for every conceivable permutation of starting points, and is talking about properly proving things and giving the general case; examples should be there for illustration, to show the student that it's not as hard as the abstract notation can make it seem, and not be the main teaching tool.)

It also takes up all the time students would have to be creative and think about other things, and possibly explore other areas.

Yeah, right, I think you have a rosier picture of students than us jaded folk on the other side of the fence; they aren't all like you.

If all teachers were difficult and tough, I highly doubt mathematics would be where it is today or any subject for that matter.

That is so far off the mark it is unbelievable. Current undergraduate standards are shockingly low, and the grading curves, positive marking, and low expectations are not good for anyone. I personally cannot stand this idea that 70%=4.0=A=First=I or whatever your version of the top mark is. It's nonsense. A maths exam where anyone but the likes of John Conway can get more than 60% is a bad exam. They should be tough to pass, and people need to stop thinking of 40% as bad; it's just a number, not an absolute: it is not as though every other student in the world did exactly the same exam.

Traditionally mathematics, and many other subjects were far far harder, with unbelievably difficult exams and high expectations. If we go to a very classical case, Isaac Newton lectured in a manner that once meant all of the students stopped attending lectures, he carried on talking to an empty room and completed the lecture course. Now that's principled mathematics (pun intended).

I would even go to the other extreme, that the current trend to teach to the lowest common denominator and be evaluated by these people (evaulations thatI doubt the student realizes carry great weight) is harming universities, and post-degree prospects for the students.

 

[George Jones]

and be evaluated by these people (evaulations thatI doubt the student realizes carry great weight) is harming universities, and post-degree prospects for the students.

From what I understand, studies (at least in North America) have shown that there is a statistical correlation between student evaluations and marks. This is truly alarming, when what you say above is taken into account.

On the other hand, students should have a forum in which they can voice their opinions.

Regards,
George

 

[Nomy-the wanderer]

Well the world is unfair, and so is the way of some professors marking the exams...Some are good enough to give you mroe than you deserve. And some are just nasty enough to pretend that you still don't get it, they just enjoy giving bad marks, and some are strict and fair.

Marks most of the time expresses nothing, because most of the exams today don't leave much space for the student to express himself, there's no difference between one who understands very well and the other thta memorize veyr well...But there's no doubt, that a paper of a person who knows what he's talaking about will speak for itself...But still not necessarily true...It's not fully my responsability, partly the marks are the professor's responsability.

You know the only exam I've ever left empty, was the law exam, and yet the professor instead of stamping a fail on my paper, he just gave me a D, and no one gets a higher grade than c in law. if we assume that C is an A for this professor, than I've got a B with an empty paper, just made a point or 2 from my general information, also I'm not that good with writing arabic, so i think he just pitied me.

And for example, I'm the best in machine design, says who, the professor and also says the exam paper, I've got C not that i did anythign wrong, just done some mistakes with my calculator, noting that all the numbers are logic, but the professor like exactiduness(it was a bad numbers day), and a proper paper with some decorations(a quality i don't have).

 

[Physicist]

Thanks everyone

I wanted to clarify the reason I posted this topic..

I've just graduated from physics department and working now as a teacher at the same university. I'm asking now to be fair with my students. I'm not caring about MY marks.

We have a big problem with introductory physics students (science students) since last semester only 9% passed! but then they make a curve so 25% passed!

The professors are saying that it's the students fault beacuse they are lazy, weak in mathematics...etc. OK that's true but still 9% says that the problem is not from the students only. I'm trying to figure out where the pronblem is exactly. So I thought maybe the way of correcting is unfair.

The first problem is that at our university we don't have tutorials or assignments. The marks distribution is: 25% lab, 25% for 2 midterms, 50% final exam.In this semester some assistant teachers and me are giving extra tutorials.

Another thing could be the problem which is the time of the exam. Ofcourse if the student practice enough he will need less time. But some of the students I know that they really worked hard but couldn't finish the exam because of time. How should we estimate the time? I asked their professor she said that she solved the exam in 30 min so 1 h is enough for students. I feel that this not fair. Maybe we should multiply the time the professor need by 3.

I'm really disappointed because of what happening. I don't want the students to get disappointed and give up but also I don't want them to pass unless they reach the standard level. So I want to have different experience, please let me know what is happening in your universities.

If you have any ideas that could help the students please let me know. I will try to translate one of their exams and show to you to see is it normal compared to world wide universities.

 

[scorpa]

If a course is hard then yes the exams are going to be hard, that's fine...deal with it. What I don't agree with is when you have many sections of a course with each section being taught by a different prof. One prof gives out easy exams and everyone does well...easy A. The next guy deliberately sets out to make the averages for his tests low...and I mean very low. Now the person with the hard prof may not have come out with as good of a mark but learned more material and learned it better than the person with the easy prof who came out with a good mark. The person with the easy mark will get into the program they want before the person with the lower mark will. That is what I don't agree with.

What you said about running tutorials I think is a really good idea. I had a prof who ran them and they helped immensely. He would always spend half of the time working the harder problems in the textbook and we could stop and ask questions at any time. The rest of the time we could ask whatever we wanted and he wouldn't leave until the last question was answered. You said that there are no assignments, maybe you could post a list of recommended problems from the textbook that the students can work through on their own. The dedicated ones will do them and learn the material, the ones who decide not to do them because they are not mandatory will fail as they should.

 

[JasonRox]

If a course is hard then yes the exams are going to be hard, that's fine...deal with it. What I don't agree with is when you have many sections of a course with each section being taught by a different prof. One prof gives out easy exams and everyone does well...easy A. The next guy deliberately sets out to make the averages for his tests low...and I mean very low. Now the person with the hard prof may not have come out with as good of a mark but learned more material and learned it better than the person with the easy prof who came out with a good mark. The person with the easy mark will get into the program they want before the person with the lower mark will. That is what I don't agree with.

What you said about running tutorials I think is a really good idea. I had a prof who ran them and they helped immensely. He would always spend half of the time working the harder problems in the textbook and we could stop and ask questions at any time. The rest of the time we could ask whatever we wanted and he wouldn't leave until the last question was answered. You said that there are no assignments, maybe you could post a list of recommended problems from the textbook that the students can work through on their own. The dedicated ones will do them and learn the material, the ones who decide not to do them because they are not mandatory will fail as they should.

Hard courses/classes/profs do not correlate with learning more.

I'm in a course right now that I might even FAIL. Everyone in the course (6 others, so I know everyone) says the course is difficult and that no one knows what is going on. The others shouldn't have a problem passing. The odd part is that they say the professor is hard, but that's not true at all. The professor doesn't teach. That's the real problem in our class. He flat out does not teach. Sadly enough, the other students are scoring higher than I, but I probably understand it the most out of all of them. I'm being serious here. This was evident when discussing anything about the course.

If I fail the course, I will not retake it since I do not need to. My undergraduate project will be related to the material of the course. In fact, you need to know everything about the course as I will go much further in the study. I can guarantee that profs will be asking me how did I fail the course when I'm doing something beyond that, and my answer...

"I didn't fail. The professor did."

 

[leon1127]

i came from a place where if you miss part A but you did everything else correctly except all answer was based on part A, you still don't get credit AT ALL. That was for maths and science.
For language, if you misspell a word wrong, 1 mark deduction per mistake even it might be an one mart question. (consider if you need to write 600 word article within 30 mins, I wonder how many people in US can write a good article under those conditions without error.)
For manner, if you sit in your seat improperly, you earn a detention. (my personal experience- i was sitting with my leg cross, i got one.)
Back in my day, the highest grade in maths among entire 7th grade was 87

I always tell my little sister these,
"Learn how to appreciate what you have."
"Compare with what is harder"

 

[JasonRox]

For language, if you misspell a word wrong, 1 point deduction per mistake.

Well, that's if you have a nice teacher.

If you misspell a common word, you get zero and it ends there.

If you get common grammar errors, it was 20% each.

I'd love to trade.

Sure I appreciate what I got, but I don't appreciate the price I paid for it. If I pay quality dollars, I want quality education and there is no excuse for ripping me off. I'm not asking for easy and I never have. A professor that I seem to share things understands what I mean. I rather get a zero and learn 10 times more than get 90% and pretend I know something. The professor I got in the course I mentionned earlier is going to get me a bad mark and no knowledge, so technically I get nothing. I'm getting ripped. If you aren't going to teach, atleast give me the grades.

 

[mathwonk]

All my students have passed courses in the prerequisites to my course, but almost none of them have understood or remembered any of the prerequisite material.

I would infinitely rather have students who understand the previous material but received D's in it, rather than students who received A's and B's but do not have any idea of any of it.

I myself got a D- in first year honors calc, but decided I wanted to take 2nd year modern abstract advanced honors (several variable) calc anyway (a la Dieudonne), so I went to the teacher and asked what I should know before trying it.

From his response I obtained a classical advanced calculus book by David Widder, prepared myself, took the later course and received a B+ and A- in the 2 semesters of it, then took graduate analysis as a senior, got an A, then got a recommendation to grad school, and obtained an NDEA graduate fellowship.

Grades are only used to frighten weak students. If you are not afraid of what you will get, you will be fine.

To be more blunt, a good student is obvious to all, grades or not. If ytou are worried you will not make a good impression because your grades are low, you are probably a weak student, or very naive. If you are strong, you do not need grades to prove it, you prove it by your presence, by your conversation. Anyone can tell in a few minutes of conversation with you.

if a student comes in telling me what grade he got in calculus, i just ask him to state the fundamental theorem, of calculus, or prove it. they usually say something like "Well it's been a long time, I don't remember." I am not impressed by such responses, whether they heve A's or not.

A good student can state the main theorems, explain why they are true, prove them, and use them in examples. Weak students cannot do any of these. Grades have nothing to do with my assessment of them.

 

[JasonRox]

you are still totally missing the point that learning the material should be your goal, rather than passing the course. ... hello?

All my students have passed courses in the prerequisites to my course, but almost none of them have understood or remembered any of the prerequisite material.

I would infinitely rather have students who understand the previous material but received D's in it, rather than students who received A's and B's but do not have any idea of any of it.

I myself got a D- in first year honors calc, but decided I wanted to take 2nd year modern abstract advanced honors (several variable) calc anyway (a la Dieudonne), so I went to the teacher and asked what I should know before trying it.

From his response I obtained a classical advanced calculus book by David Widder, prepared myself, took the later course and received a B+ and A- in the 2 semesters of it, then took graduate analysis as a senior, got an A, then got a recommendation to grad school, and obtained an NDEA graduate fellowship.

Grades are only used to frighten weak students. If you are not afraid of what you will get, you will be fine.

To be more blunt, a good student is obvious to all, grades or not. If ytou are worried you will not make a good impression because your grades are low, you are probably a weak student, or very naive. If you are strong, you do not need grades to prove it, you prove it by your presence, by your conversation. Anyone can tell in a few minutes conversation with you.

That's exactly what I described in my previous post.

I don't care about my grades. Sometimes too literally. :uhh:

 

[mathwonk]

you are right.

 

[luckycharms]

All my students have passed courses in the prerequisites to my course, but almost none of them have understood or remembered any of the prerequisite material.

I would infinitely rather have students who understand the previous material but received D's in it, rather than students who received A's and B's but do not have any idea of any of it..

The obvious question is why does a student who understands the course material have a D in that course? I fully support hard problems/courses/tests but shouldn't the final grade be a reflection of their relative mastery of the subject? You absolutely need to design tests and have a grading system that accurately reflect what they know.

The grade inflation problem is a tough one to handle. Since it's happening everywhere, it's very difficult to put your students at a relative disadvantage. The reality is that even a fractionally lower GPA can be a major cross to bear. GPA is often a blind cutoff for graduate school and job applications, so the student may never even get a chance to show everything that you taught them by being so tough on them.

 

[mathwonk]

i think i gave you my own example of a student, me, who got a D I richly deserved, then made up the knowledge on my own afterwards in order to learn it and continue.

this is the opposite of a student who takes a course and gets an A, then either forgets the material or never really knew it having gotten an inflated grade, then takes the next course with no knowledge ready at hand for use.i.e. the prerequisite of an advanced course is to know the material from the rperecquisite course, not just to have an A in that course.

And you may ask why a student with an A does not know the material? Besides inflation, have you ever put off studying for a test until the last night then memorized everything for short term learning, promptly forgetting it after two more days? or waited two years after taking a preprec course before taking the next course?

So many of my students, even smart ones, "study" this way that when I test for genuine mastery, not memorizing, so many fail that I feel constrained from giving them the honest grades they deserve. I.e. the consequences to me of giving honest grades are too severe.

Even in graduate prelims we are sometimes expected to test in a way that is expected by the students, rather than in a way that measures how much they understand.

I.e. we are expected by some people to test so as to produce large numbers of passing grades. so if the students study by practicing old tests, rather than by mastering the topics, then we are expected by these people to test by repeating old questions rather than by plumbing understanding.

In this case i can stick to my guns without great penalty, but I do encounter resistance, and perhaps criticism. some students have complained that they are expected to understand the material in "too great a depth", this is an exact quote from a student complaint.

the fundamental complaint in posts here that some teachers grade in a way that does not reflect what the student knows, but this is very suspect to me, and more like a wishful thinking excuse by a weak student.

I will say however that I feel one instance of inaccurate grading has begun to occur in my university, but in a way that raises most students' grades.

namely in the past i could always pass the prelim tests in every subject, even those not my specialty, because i understand the basic ideas. the students did not pass however in many cases.

Recently the opposite has been occurring. The tests have seemed harder to me and I do not pass them as easily or not at all, while the students pass them more easily. Curiously the same students seem to pass the harder tests and fail the easier ones.

then i learned informally that these harder tests may be mimicking exams already taken by those same students in prep courses on the material. so they already knew how to do those questions, which being less basic i did not know how to do.

the result is a higher passing rate at least for students coming out of the prep courses, and the students and some administrators apparently like this situation better than the old one where the tests actually revealed gaps in students knowledge.nonetheless, hyperventilation over grades is usually a smokescreen for students who know nothing and are seeking an excuse for poor performance. At my own grad school, when we complained about the prelims, we were told they were for our own good. I.e. if we could eprsuade anyone to take us on as a student then we could advance in the rpogram.

If no one was persuaded that we were promising, we could pass the prelims, and then someone had to accept us. So the rpelims were a way of demonstrating that we were worthy when we had not succeeded in doping so otherwise.'

'this argument was hard to answer and i shut up.

 

[mathwonk]

your basic asumption that grades are more important than knowledge is still wrong. this argument was used at harvard over the past few decades - that harvard grades were unfair becuase a C at harvard was an A at florida state or georgia.

while perhaps true, the consequences of the resulting inflating of grades at harvard has meant that this is no longer true.

i.e. harvard is no longer harvard, and an A at harvard is not worth what it used to be. Although SAT scores went down over the last 40 years according to harvard's own alumni magazine, (but denied by a spokesperson i called), average grades went up from C+ to A-.

(when i was in non honors freshman writing at harvard in 1960 i was told that anyone who could get an A on a paper did not belong in the course.)

basically harvard stduents argued they did not want to be held to harvard standards so those standards were done away with, to everyones detriment.

i no longer am more impressed by an A at harvard than one at georgia. this cannot be possibly conceived of as an advantage for harvard's students who argued for this state of affairs.

 

[JasonRox]

mathwonk you summed it up very nicely.

I think what's happening at my school is that the profs just don't care anymore with regards to grades. They just give them easy work and that's it.

This sounds great, but now students are running off to graduate school unprepared. When I mentionned the tests one must take during graduate school just to stay in graduate school, two prospective graduate students nearly pissed their pants. Why? They know themselves that they don't know ****. And the other prospective graduate students who are bright also know they aren't ready for graduate school, and are feeling the heat. We also have prospective graduate students who are not naive, like the first two above, and know about tests and what not, but think they are ready to go. This I found was due to arrogance and are bound to get a slap in the face.

Anyways, our school needs a lot of work.

 

[luckycharms]

your basic asumption that grades are more important than knowledge is still wrong. this argument was used at harvard over the past few decades - that harvard grades were unfair becuase a C at harvard was an A at florida state or georgia.

Who assumes that? All I'm saying is that classes can still be challenging without handing out C's to your best students. Grades matter to students because they matter to other people. If not, how about we petition our departments to drop GPA from graduate school applications?

You articulate a clear set of standards at the beginning of the course, you create exceptionally challenging problem sets, you make an earnest attempt to teach the motivated, and then you test to the originally articulated standards. I don't buy into the 'impossible A' or the expectation that a sophomore should have a graduate level understanding.

 

[JasonRox]

Who assumes that? All I'm saying is that classes can still be challenging without handing out C's to your best students. Grades matter to students because they matter to other people. If not, how about we petition our departments to drop GPA from graduate school applications?

You articulate a clear set of standards at the beginning of the course, you create exceptionally challenging problem sets, you make an earnest attempt to teach the motivated, and then you test to the originally articulated standards. I don't buy into the 'impossible A' or the expectation that a sophomore should have a graduate level understanding.

I don't think he says to set the standards high. I believe he's saying who cares about the standards.

Sure as students we care, but that's only because graduate schools do. I'm sure if you stopped caring about them, started challenging yourself, going beyond the course, and started to explore your interests of mathematics by the time you graduate you will have explored areas of mathematics that most students wait until graduate school to learn. I'm sure with that under your belt and the idea that half of the faculty would recognize your knowledge you would have no problem getting into graduate school.

(You basically get lots of letters of recommendation that describe you as someone more than prepared for graduate school rather than the old lame this kid is a great student because he shows up, blah, blah, and blah.)

 

[luckycharms]

I agree with that for the most part. An open-ended exploratory approach is almost always going to be better than a "learn A, B, and C" approach. My advocacy was more addressing how teachers should approach grading, rather than students. A good professor should give good grades to good students.

It also depends to a large degree on the type of class you're teaching. An intro class for underclassmen has an entirely different mission than one for upperclassmen majors or graduate students and should probably be taught in a different way.

 

[mathwonk]

you seem to think that now good students do not get good grades because their professors are perverse or uncaring. i disagree. i believe almost all professors give good grades to students they believe are good students.

professors love genuinely good students, but they are so rare.

but many students think they are good students who do not know anything. the student often thinks he is a good student because he has no concept of what a good student really is, and he has always received high grades for pitiful work.

just because no one in a class is capable of getting an A does not mean an A is impossible. it means the class is exceptionally weak.

i gave an entrance exam to an incoming calc class once to see how many people knew the basic algebra and trig that was assumed. the questions were on the order of "give the equation of the line through these two points", or "define the sine of an angle", or "factor x^3 - 8".

the average score was 10% correct, for an entering class of calculus students, many of whom had taken AP calculus. Then after handing it back, I gave the test again as homework, due the next day. A certain number of students dropped out entirely, others did not bother to turn in the hw, and the average score of those who did turn it in as an open book test was 15% correct.

how many A's do you think should have been expected from this class?
One foreign born woman got 100% and received an A at the end of the course. that may have been the only A.

A's were not impossible but these students were so weak they had no idea of what it meant to be prepared for a course.

You say one should articulate expectations at the beginning of the course.
Do you have any idea of how to accomplish that in today's world? I wrote clear expectations, handed them out, emailed them, and wrote at the top of the syllabus for everyone to send me their email address the first day. this was to discern whether they read the handout or not.

After 4 days I had received precisely one email address from 35 students. Convinced that no one had read the sylalbus, I brought in a laptop, projected it on the screen and read it aloud to the class. Many tuned me out completely, and still ignored all expectations enunciated there.

When the typical class ignores all warnings as to what is expected before and during a course, refuses to attend office hours, declines to ask questions, does not read the book, skips numerous lectures, it is to be expected that honest A's are very scarce.If you think you deserve better grades than you are getting, unless you are in a very unusual situation, I suggest you are probably fooling yourself.

 

[mathwonk]

in my class at harvard where the prof said anyone who could write an A paper did not belong in the course, i was at first offended. I had always gotten high grades on my writing in high school and praise, and I spent rather little time on my papers then.

For some time I was resentful, and I even wrote some angry papers attacking the status quo in florid prose. Although he did not give me good scores, my professor was patient and just said somehting like: "I cannot understand this", in regard to my diatribe.

Eventually I began to mature, and to consider how to get better at writing according to the higher standards I was being exposed to. I slowly improved, and finally by the time I was a senior I got one A- on a written paper on James Joyce.

I really tried on that paper, spent time on it, read my sources carefully and thoughtfully, and was proud of the result, and of the A-.

Although I never got any honors on my writing or great grades, I have been able to write competently ever since. it has stood me in good stead all my life. No one wants to know my grades from college writing class.

the proof of the pudding is that when i write someone's promotion dossier, it succeeds. When I petition for a raise, I get it. When I explain something, people understand it. If I write a paper, or a set of notes, it is clear. In short I learned how to write better than I meant to, because the standards were higher than I anticipated.If you want to improve, choose a good teacher and try to please him or her. Do not set your own standards, but accept those of the most demanding school you can find. You will not be sorry, if you honestly try to meet them.When i went to grad school for a PhD, I was also resentul of needing a PhD to continue my professional career, because I was convinced I knew more than many people holding them. I was frustrated that I seemed to be held to higher standard than many others in getting my degree.

But eventually I realized that I was being forced, or encouraged, to reach as high as I was capable of, by people who saw better than I what was my potential.

Afterwards I acknowledged that a PhD had invovled doing more than I had thought possible for myself, and I appreciated the experience, which had lifted me into a more enlightened place mathematically. I understood better what others had accomplished who held them

If you worry that good grades matter more than the knowledge you get, and you seem to, you are still very naive. But you are obviously very intelligent, so that will change.

 

[JasonRox]

you seem to think that now good students do not get good grades because their professors are perverse or uncaring. i disagree. i believe almost all professors give good grades to students they believe are good students.

professors love genuinely good students, but they are so rare.

but many students think they are good students who do not know anything. the student often thinks he is a good student because he has no concept of what a good student really is, and he has always received high grades for pitiful work.

just because no one in a class is capable of getting an A does not mean an A is impossible. it means the class is exceptionally weak.

i gave an entrance exam to an incoming calc class once to see how many people knew the basic algebra and trig that was assumed. the questions were on the order of "give the equation of the line through these two points", or "define the sine of an angle", or "factor x^3 - 8".

the average score was 10% correct, for an entering class of calculus students, many of whom had taken AP calculus. Then after handing it back, I gave the test again as homework, due the next day. A certain number of students dropped out entirely, others did not bother to turn in the hw, and the average score of those who did turn it in as an open book test was 15% correct.

how many A's do you think should have been expected from this class?
One foreign born woman got 100% and received an A at the end of the course. that may have been the only A.

A's were not impossible but these students were so weak they had no idea of what it meant to be prepared for a course.

You say one should articulate expectations at the beginning of the course.
Do you have any idea of how to accomplish that in today's world? I wrote clear expectations, handed them out, emailed them, and wrote at the top of the syllabus for everyone to send me their email address the first day. this was to discern whether they read the handout or not.

After 4 days I had received precisely one email address from 35 students. Convinced that no one had read the sylalbus, I brought in a laptop, projected it on the screen and read it aloud to the class. Many tuned me out completely, and still ignored all expectations enunciated there.

When the typical class ignores all warnings as to what is expected before and during a course, refuses to attend office hours, declines to ask questions, does not read the book, skips numerous lectures, it is to be expected that honest A's are very scarce.


If you think you deserve better grades than you are getting, unless you are in a very unusual situation, I suggest you are probably fooling yourself.

WHY CAN'T YOU TEACH AT OUR SCHOOL?!

You seem very organized and caring about the material you teach. We need more professors who organize the material being taught.

At this point, I wish anyone can replace my one specific professor right now. A 10 year old kid would do since that is more entertaining.

 

[mathwonk]

every school has both caring and motivated professors, and also lazy and sometimes incompetent ones. try very hard to find out which is which at your school, and take courses only from the best ones.

when you find who they are, work hard at ghetting into their classes. at harvard too there were some terrible teachers. i remember one teaching assistant for whom the course evaluations said " lynch mobs are being organized for professor..." the professors are usually muich better than the teaching assistants, and full professors are often better than younger ones, but not always.

energy counts in teaching as well as experience and knowledge.interview the professor if the course is full and ask permission to get in. remind him that some will drop out and you will still be there and will work hard. then live up to your promises, and put in the time to do well. do not shirk on the promise you made him and yourself to do your best. ask questions, study and show up for office hours.

best of luck.

 

[mathwonk]

i am reminded of my whining to my father that he expected too much of me as a boy. actually i did no homework at all, and spent all my time playing. then when i got to harvard i found that i was far behind the others. he had been right, my school had extremely low standards and i was used to them. it was very hard to catch up, it took years, decades really.

my father bought me a copy of louis de broglie's book "a non mathematical survey of quanta" when i was a child, and i saw that as evidence of his ridiculous expectations for me and refused to read it. i finally read it a few years ago, and realized how wonderful it might have been to have read it sooner.if you are arguing that someone expects more from you than is reasonable, you are limiting your ability to grow.

 

[JasonRox]

if you are arguing that someone expects more from you than is reasonable, you are limiting your ability to grow.

No one expects more from me, so that wouldn't be my problem.

We don't have options on which professors to choose. One prof teaches every course. The mathematics department is rather small. It's more of a... don't take it now... wait till next year thing.

I wish I dropped the course! DAMMIT!

Anyways, what do you think of?

Basic Complex Analysis by Hoffsman/Marsden

...and...

Visual Complex Analysis by Needham

 

[Stephan Hoyer]

We don't have options on which professors to choose. One prof teaches every course. The mathematics department is rather small. It's more of a... don't take it now... wait till next year thing.

We have a similar case at my school. Occasionally there will be sections of a class with different instructors, but the department chair is notorious for frowning on changing courses for the professor, so much so that the multiple sections are usually taught at the same time so there is no excuse to change.

Still, I have a fair amount of flexibility in terms of which math courses I take when, so I just change the order of my studies. It can get a little tricky to rejuggle prerequisites but it usually works out.

 

[luckycharms]

If you worry that good grades matter more than the knowledge you get, and you seem to, you are still very naive. But you are obviously very intelligent, so that will change.

Nowhere have I said such a thing, so I'll assume that you are referring to someone else's post. At any rate, I'm far past the point where my GPA is a relevant concern of mine.

Obviously, knowledge is paramount to long term success. My point is that grades can handicap opportunity in the short term, perhaps severely, and that is a realistic and reasonable concern for students. Professors can be mindful of that without sacrificing quality or lowering expectations. And motivators don't necessarily have to be punitive. That is my moderate position and I have no interest in arguing the extremes.