Things you consider academic dishonesty , but people do all the time?

[micromass]

Those with 'test-taking anxiety' appear not to know the material.

I doubt you know many people with test-taking anxiety then. People with test-taking anxiety might know their material perfectly and still perform lousy.
Anxiety on tests has nothing to do with not knowing the material with these people.

As always, you need to have a "disorder" in order to understand it...

 

[tedbradly]

I doubt you know many people with test-taking anxiety then. People with test-taking anxiety might know their material perfectly and still perform lousy.
Anxiety on tests has nothing to do with not knowing the material with these people.

As always, you need to have a "disorder" in order to understand it...

Ok. If they apparently know the material, they fall into category (2). It's actually their lack of brightness or memory that conceals the material by which the anxiety spawns. The anxiety is not responsible for concealing the material to the anxious.

 

[tedbradly]

I disagree. I'm both dedicated to studying AND smart enough, but that's not enough to keep my anxiety at bay.

I'm not sure I believe you. You'd have to be irrational to have anxiety if you truly have those three attributes.

Don't confuse being a bit anxious with having this apparent 'anxiety test-taking disorder.' As an example, I can feel my heart racing before getting a test, and I wake up 45 minutes before my clock fires on the day of a test, feeling my heart race. I am anxious and excited. However, the anxiety does not influence my abilities to regurgitate information or solve problems. And after I finish the test 45 minutes early, I take a nice sigh, drink from my water, and begin going over each problem once more.

 

[micromass]

Ok. If they apparently know the material, they fall into category (2). It's actually their lack of brightness or memory that conceals the material by which the anxiety spawns. The anxiety is not responsible for concealing the material to the anxious.

No, not at all. Ever heard of black-outs?? People know the material perfectly before the test and after the test, but can't do anything during the tests.

Don't generalize what you think is true for other people. Most people are very, very different from each other. Find some people with test-anxiety and talk to them with an open mind, you'll be surprised!

 

[tedbradly]

No, not at all. Ever heard of black-outs?? People know the material perfectly before the test and after the test, but can't do anything during the tests.

Don't generalize what you think is true for other people. Most people are very, very different from each other. Find some people with test-anxiety and talk to them with an open mind, you'll be surprised!

I've never heard of that. It sounds like a (2) lying about his state of affairs (to you and himself). See, it was his unintelligence that mired his progress on the test, despite him superficially knowing the material -- not some apparent blackout.

 

[micromass]

I've never heard of that. It sounds like a (2) lying about his state of affairs (to you and himself). See, it was his unintelligence that mired his progress on the test, despite him superficially knowing the material -- not some apparent blackout.

Trust me, he knew his material extremely well! The entire class always went to him to ask various questions and he always came up with brilliant answers. He just couldn't do tests... Is that so hard to believe?

 

[tedbradly]

Trust me, he knew his material extremely well! The entire class always went to him to ask various questions and he always came up with brilliant answers. He just couldn't do tests... Is that so hard to believe?

Yes. It sounds like a cocky (2) that fooled everyone into thinking he was not (2).

 

[JaredJames]

tedbradley, I direct you to do some reading and stop claiming something that is known to exist, doesn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_anxiety

Note the causes listed in that article and their effects - exactly as micro described.

Can someone please link to the thread on this that was here not so long ago?

I'd add that your own personal ideas regarding not knowing the material don't mean anything here, unless of course you're going to start backing it up.

 

[ideasrule]

I'm not sure I believe you. You'd have to be irrational to have anxiety if you truly have those three attributes.

You think all human beings are rational? Tell me how feeling sad after a relative's death is rational. Tell me how freaking out over tiny insects is rational. Tell me how being scared of the dark in a modern, 21st century home is rational. We've evolved to survive in the wild, not to be scientific equipment that objectively analyzes the world.

Also, we're specifically talking about an anxiety disorder. By definition, a disorder is not rational or normal; it's a mental illness. Do you also reject the reality of Alzheimer's disease or schizophrenia because victims don't act rationally?

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Yes. It sounds like a cocky (2) that fooled everyone into thinking he was not (2).

Dude, do you actually believe that anxiety DOESN'T EXIST. Like you can't conceive of it. Like if a person is scared of a spider it is because they are literally unprepared for a spider attack and have inferior spider defensive abilities. If these people were sat down and taught some sort of anti-spider martial art they would cease to feel anxiety. Are people scared of heights because they're more aerodynamic? In your mind is fear of heights correlated to your physique's drag coefficient? Is that like actually a thing in your head? People get anxious about tests, they doubt themselves. They come across a question that at first flush they don't know the answer to, their mind then spins off to think about what would happen if they failed this test. Would they get kicked out of school? Their parents would never forgive them. They'd kick them out! That's the only logical consequence of them getting this question wrong! Oh my god, they're going to be homeless and degreeless and destitute and they're going to die alone in a cardboard box! Oh wait, the answer is C. And wham, 20 minutes have gone by.

The fact that you apparently suffer no anxiety suggest to me that you're either not in particularly challenging environment or are Dwight Schrute.

 

[JaredJames]

or are Dwight Schrute.

Wow, I was thinking exactly the same thing!

Chocolate milkshake up my monitor after reading that.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Wow, I was thinking exactly the same thing!

Chocolate milkshake up my monitor after reading that.

Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.

 

[tedbradly]

tedbradley, I direct you to do some reading and stop claiming something that is known to exist, doesn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_anxiety

Note the causes listed in that article and their effects - exactly as micro described.

Can someone please link to the thread on this that was here not so long ago?

I'd add that your own personal ideas regarding not knowing the material don't mean anything here, unless of course you're going to start backing it up.

I've told you how it manifests, which is misleading to everyone who has it or measures it. Sure, it exists, but it's not a problem.

You think all human beings are rational? Tell me how feeling sad after a relative's death is rational. Tell me how freaking out over tiny insects is rational. Tell me how being scared of the dark in a modern, 21st century home is rational. We've evolved to survive in the wild, not to be scientific equipment that objectively analyzes the world.

Also, we're specifically talking about an anxiety disorder. By definition, a disorder is not rational or normal; it's a mental illness. Do you also reject the reality of Alzheimer's disease or schizophrenia because victims don't act rationally?

People with mental disorders deserve their failing grades. But that is beyond the issue at hand. See, the people allegedly with this 'disorder' create the anxiety after either not knowing the material or not being bright enough to apply what they know. It's not the anxiety that makes them fail. They failed first and reacted to it.

Dude, do you actually believe that anxiety DOESN'T EXIST. Like you can't conceive of it. Like if a person is scared of a spider it is because they are literally unprepared for a spider attack and have inferior spider defensive abilities. If these people were sat down and taught some sort of anti-spider martial art they would cease to feel anxiety. Are people scared of heights because they're more aerodynamic? In your mind is fear of heights correlated to your physique's drag coefficient? Is that like actually a thing in your head? People get anxious about tests, they doubt themselves. They come across a question that at first flush they don't know the answer to, their mind then spins off to think about what would happen if they failed this test. Would they get kicked out of school? Their parents would never forgive them. They'd kick them out! That's the only logical consequence of them getting this question wrong! Oh my god, they're going to be homeless and degreeless and destitute and they're going to die alone in a cardboard box! Oh wait, the answer is C. And wham, 20 minutes have gone by.

The fact that you apparently suffer no anxiety suggest to me that you're either not in particularly challenging environment or are Dwight Schrute.

So it all comes down to the person not knowing the answer (in your example). Like I said, (1) or (2) creates the anxiety -- it's not the anxiety that creates failing. Refer to my previous answer to ideasrule for more information on what I'm saying.

 

[JaredJames]

I've told you how it manifests, which is misleading to everyone who has it or measures it. Sure, it exists, but it's not a problem.

People with mental disorders deserve their failing grades. But that is beyond the issue at hand. See, the people allegedly with this 'disorder' create the anxiety after either not knowing the material or not being bright enough to apply what they know. It's not the anxiety that makes them fail. They failed first and reacted to it.

So it all comes down to the person not knowing the answer (in your example). Like I said, (1) or (2) creates the anxiety -- it's not the anxiety that creates failing. Refer to my previous answer to ideasrule for more information on what I'm saying.

Uh, as per above, your own personal theories and explanations ain't worth squat here. Perhaps you could supply something to support your explanation of why it occurs?

You seem to have pinned down the cause pretty quickly and very certainly without any support for it. Yet people have been studying it since 1950 according to the wiki article and they haven't solved it. How clever are you...

 

[tedbradly]

Uh, as per above, your own personal theories and explanations ain't worth squat here. Perhaps you could supply something to support your explanation of why it occurs?

Just stop being delusional and examine yourself. You suffer from the anxiety. Then, you can attest to my true theory. For evidence, examine maverick_starstrider's anecdote, which details not knowing an answer prior to the feeling the anxiety.

 

[JaredJames]

For evidence, examine maverick_starstrider's anecdote, which details not knowing an answer prior to the feeling the anxiety.

No, the person thought they didn't know the answer, panicked and then realized they did know it. They knew the material and the answer, but panic set in.

 

[tedbradly]

No, the person thought they didn't know the answer, panicked and then realized they did know it. They knew the material and the answer, but panic set in.

They thought they didn't know the answer, because they were unintelligent. Thus, they had (2).

 

[JaredJames]

They thought they didn't know the answer, because they were unintelligent. Thus, they had (2).

Utter non-sense. You are able to proclaim they are unintelligent purely because they panicked on one question.

I would love to see some citations showing that a person not knowing one test answer is considered unintelligent.

 

[tedbradly]

Utter non-sense. You are able to proclaim they are unintelligent purely because they panicked on one question.

True. They could have just been unprepared, meaning they were (1). See, it all comes down to them superficially understanding the material or not understanding it at all, both of which can come from a lack of preparation or intelligence. Then, they panic in response to observing their losses. The panic did not cause the losses.

 

[JaredJames]

True. They could have just been unprepared, meaning they were (1). See, it all comes down to them superficially understanding the material or not understanding it at all, both of which can come from a lack of preparation or intelligence. Then, they panic in response to observing their losses. The panic did not cause the losses.

Or, they were well prepared and knew the materials, but something distracted them enough to put them off and cause panic to set in.

You seem to be under the impression that all humans are the same and react identically to each other under similar circumstances. This is simply not true.

Heck, a hormone imbalance can mean the difference between sitting quietly and accepting being shouted at or bawling your eyes out. Little things.

 

[tedbradly]

Or, they were well prepared and knew the materials, but something distracted them enough to put them off and cause panic to set in.

You seem to be under the impression that all humans are the same and react identically to each other under similar circumstances. This is simply not true.

Heck, a hormone imbalance can mean the difference between sitting quietly and accepting being shouted at or bawling your eyes out. Little things.

I understand your reluctance to accept the theory, because you admittedly don't suffer from (1), saying you study often and are good at hands-on stuff. This funnels our attention toward (2), which would mean you're not the brightest bulb in the drawer. Personally, I'd be proud to be a good worker and unintelligent. Then, your success is more impressive. It's a bit insulting when students overlook how much someone studies and works hard, passing off their academic achievement as natural by (allegedly) praising, "wow, he or she is so smart for getting As!" or "I wish I was[sic] as smart as him or her." No, that undermines their hard work.

After someone beefs up his muscles, people don't explain, "Wow! I wish I were as muscularly inclined as him!" They say, "Wow, good job and excellent persistent work you put in at the gym."

 

[JaredJames]

I understand your reluctance to accept the theory, because you admittedly don't suffer from (1), saying you study often and are good at hands-on stuff. This funnels our attention toward (2), which would mean you're not the brightest bulb in the drawer.

Well seeing as you love exams, perhaps you'd like my IQ score? That certainly disagrees with you.

I'm still waiting for the support for your 'personal theory' on test anxiety.

 

[ideasrule]

See, the people allegedly with this 'disorder' create the anxiety after either not knowing the material or not being bright enough to apply what they know. It's not the anxiety that makes them fail. They failed first and reacted to it.

Two words: prove it. You've proposed a theory that contradicts existing scientific evidence. Now it's your job to prove it.

 

[tedbradly]

Well seeing as you love exams, perhaps you'd like my IQ score? That certainly disagrees with you.

I'm still waiting for the support for your 'personal theory' on test anxiety.

Please hand it over. Also mention what test it's from and its version. I'd also be interested in knowing if that IQ test had a timed element to it, and if so, how did you score highly on it? I thought you were anxious in time crunches.

Two words: prove it. You've proposed a theory that contradicts existing scientific evidence. Now it's your job to prove it.

It contradicts nothing. It's an alternative explanation for all of the evidence.

 

[JaredJames]

Please hand it over. Also mention what test it's from and its version. I'd also be interested in knowing if that IQ test had a timed element to it, and if so, how did you score highly on it? I thought you were anxious in time crunches.

The IQ test was a blind test performed without prior study on my part. The result was 156. It was within the top 1% of the population. I'm unaware of the latter details you wanted.

I'd still like support for your theory. A quick Google shows a large number of papers published on test anxiety that all disagree with you.

It contradicts nothing. It's an alternative explanation for all of the evidence.

No it's not. You deny anxiety exists in the scientifically recognised form and create your own version and as such draw a false conclusion.

 

[tedbradly]

The IQ test was a blind test performed without prior study on my part. The result was 156. It was within the top 1% of the population. I'm unaware of the latter details you wanted.

I'd still like support for your theory. A quick Google shows a large number of papers published on test anxiety that all disagree with you.

I'm afraid not all IQ tests are created equally, and without knowing the test's name or version, your score means nothing.

My theory explains all facts alternatively. Their conclusions disagree with mine, but the evidence does not contradict my theory. The former is irrelevant, and the latter is all-important.

 

[JaredJames]

I'm afraid not all IQ tests are created equally, and without knowing the test's name or version, your score means nothing.

My point I was trying to go for is that IQ tests are irrelevant for showing intelligence and yet you willingly go for them. An IQ test doesn't judge my topic specific knowledge and 'wisdom' so it doesn't mean anything in that regard.

My theory explains all facts alternatively. Their conclusions disagree with mine, but the evidence does not contradict my theory. The former is irrelevant, and the latter is all-important.

Your theory has no support at all. Please show the support if you have it as per forum rules. Remember, the rules say mainstream published science only.

No one here will take you seriously if it's just something you cooked up in your head.

I can either believe tedbradly or all the published scientists on the matter - such a hard choice.

 

[micromass]

tedbradly, you need to provide some kind of citation that test anxiety occurs only if (1) or (2) holds. This is a scientific forum, thus personal experiences, personal beliefs and others don't matter here. Only the science matters. So, unless you bring up some kind of citation (heck, even wiki or something of the sort will do), you did not win.

I can bring up any crackpot theory, proclaim it's true and then say "I win"...

 

[JaredJames]

(heck, even wiki or something of the sort will do)

Nope, I showed that earlier. It goes against him.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

I've told you how it manifests, which is misleading to everyone who has it or measures it. Sure, it exists, but it's not a problem.

People with mental disorders deserve their failing grades. But that is beyond the issue at hand. See, the people allegedly with this 'disorder' create the anxiety after either not knowing the material or not being bright enough to apply what they know. It's not the anxiety that makes them fail. They failed first and reacted to it.

So it all comes down to the person not knowing the answer (in your example). Like I said, (1) or (2) creates the anxiety -- it's not the anxiety that creates failing. Refer to my previous answer to ideasrule for more information on what I'm saying.

I think at this point tedbradly you might want to wow us with your credentials because you clearly think you're the ubermensch, however, unless you're like Anderson or Weinberg's grad student me thinks you may be a little full of yourself (and by a little I mean a lot). It occurs to me as this talk goes on that you may be in high school. Is this the case?

 

[Evo]

Problem fixed.

 

[Monster92]

[*]Obtaining copies of old exams from friends and studying from them

Is this seriously a problem? I'm genuinely interest. I haven't been to university yet do you have some courses that don't allow you to practice some past paper questions?

 

[JaredJames]

Is this seriously a problem? I'm genuinely interest. I haven't been to university yet do you have some courses that don't allow you to practice some past paper questions?

It's not a problem, or more specifically it's nothing to do with academic dishonesty.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Is this seriously a problem? I'm genuinely interest. I haven't been to university yet do you have some courses that don't allow you to practice some past paper questions?

I dunno. I've always found this unfair. At the school where I did my undergrad certain faculties' student clubs kept test banks which was helpful. However, physics didn't and there was this one group of student who all knew people from the previous year and such and they would always keep their own tests in anticipation of handing them off to the next crop that was in that group etc. So I always found it pretty unfair that you only get the added advantage of having seen a previous test if you happen to be in this one group. I always felt the physics department should make their own test bank, since if you can't stop a select few from passing down tests like a mini-fraternity or something then you should make them freely available to all. Of course that was really just the tip of the iceberg, in general I find physics departments play a little too much favorites.

 

[ideasrule]

I think at this point tedbradly you might want to wow us with your credentials because you clearly think you're the ubermensch, however, unless you're like Anderson or Weinberg's grad student me thinks you may be a little full of yourself (and by a little I mean a lot). It occurs to me as this talk goes on that you may be in high school. Is this the case?

No need to make generalizations about high school students. Crackpots exist in all age groups.

 

[Monster92]

I have something I need to get of my chest

About 4 months ago I had a mock exam in A-Level Mathematics. The teacher used a past paper exam from June 2008. The problem was I already practiced this exam paper to the point where I knew the answers off by heart. I do this for all of my A-Levels I go onto the examination board find all the resources I can (they're publicly available by the way http://www.aqa.org.uk/index.php?id=2147) and study them. I even use the teachers resources to see what they have to teach us etc. This is allowed and you can do the same by reading the link.

However, because the mock exam was something I already studied and I also looked at the mark scheme many times I got very good marks. My teacher was amazed and I know she doesn't know that A-Level examination boards like AQA put their resources online (I don't think she's very techy)

I kept quite because I thought I would get in trouble and I didn't take notice of my predicted grade.

Was I wrong to do this? Any student across the country could do it. The teacher and other students obviously didn't know about this. It's caused me to have some sleepless nights hahaha

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I have something I need to get of my chest

About 4 months ago I had a mock exam in A-Level Mathematics. The teacher used a past paper exam from June 2008. The problem was I already practiced this exam paper to the point where I knew the answers off by heart. I do this for all of my A-Levels I go onto the examination board find all the resources I can (they're publicly available by the way http://www.aqa.org.uk/index.php?id=2147) and study them. I even use the teachers resources to see what they have to teach us etc. This is allowed and you can do the same by reading the link.

However, because the mock exam was something I already studied and I also looked at the mark scheme many times I got very good marks. My teacher was amazed and I know she doesn't know that A-Level examination boards like AQA put their resources online (I don't think she's very techy)

I kept quite because I thought I would get in trouble and I didn't take notice of my predicted grade.

Was I wrong to do this? Any student across the country could do it. The teacher and other students obviously didn't know about this. It's caused me to have some sleepless nights hahaha

I don't think so at all. You used the resources available to achieve a good grade. It may have been a little bit dishonest to not tell your teacher how you were doing it but that's not academic dishonesty. I remember how stressful my A-levels were, I applaud you for doing all you can to pass the test. You didn't cheat, you just didn't admit how you were revising. It may have been nice of you to help out fellow students but that's a personal choice.

If you feel guilty that you didn't help them out you should realize that it's done now, you can't change it. Just take it as a lesson for the future and perhaps make a different choice if a similar scenario presents itself. Don't loose sleep over it though

 

[JaredJames]

I dunno. I've always found this unfair. At the school where I did my undergrad certain faculties' student clubs kept test banks which was helpful. However, physics didn't and there was this one group of student who all knew people from the previous year and such and they would always keep their own tests in anticipation of handing them off to the next crop that was in that group etc. So I always found it pretty unfair that you only get the added advantage of having seen a previous test if you happen to be in this one group. I always felt the physics department should make their own test bank, since if you can't stop a select few from passing down tests like a mini-fraternity or something then you should make them freely available to all. Of course that was really just the tip of the iceberg, in general I find physics departments play a little too much favorites.

My university keeps them all in the library.

It becomes a problem when only specific people can access them because they are kept 'guarded' and only made available to those 'in the know' or 'with access' (which sounds like your case). However, I'd question whether they aren't kept for physics by choice or simply because they can't - that would change your situation from out of anyone's control to they chose not to now they have to live with it.

I have something I need to get of my chest

About 4 months ago I had a mock exam in A-Level Mathematics. The teacher used a past paper exam from June 2008. The problem was I already practiced this exam paper to the point where I knew the answers off by heart. I do this for all of my A-Levels I go onto the examination board find all the resources I can (they're publicly available by the way http://www.aqa.org.uk/index.php?id=2147) and study them. I even use the teachers resources to see what they have to teach us etc. This is allowed and you can do the same by reading the link.

However, because the mock exam was something I already studied and I also looked at the mark scheme many times I got very good marks. My teacher was amazed and I know she doesn't know that A-Level examination boards like AQA put their resources online (I don't think she's very techy)

I kept quite because I thought I would get in trouble and I didn't take notice of my predicted grade.

Was I wrong to do this? Any student across the country could do it. The teacher and other students obviously didn't know about this. It's caused me to have some sleepless nights hahaha

There's nothing wrong with it. Firstly, the teacher should know, it's not like they keep these things quiet. Secondly, any student could access them.

Given that everyone is on equal footing in that respect, I don't see a problem.

If you revise for a real exam and almost identical questions came up, you wouldn't think of that as cheating (I know it's slightly different but it's on the same lines).

I would say though, you can't rely on the result as an indication of your ability.

 

[micromass]

I have something I need to get of my chest

About 4 months ago I had a mock exam in A-Level Mathematics. The teacher used a past paper exam from June 2008. The problem was I already practiced this exam paper to the point where I knew the answers off by heart. I do this for all of my A-Levels I go onto the examination board find all the resources I can (they're publicly available by the way http://www.aqa.org.uk/index.php?id=2147) and study them. I even use the teachers resources to see what they have to teach us etc. This is allowed and you can do the same by reading the link.

However, because the mock exam was something I already studied and I also looked at the mark scheme many times I got very good marks. My teacher was amazed and I know she doesn't know that A-Level examination boards like AQA put their resources online (I don't think she's very techy)

I kept quite because I thought I would get in trouble and I didn't take notice of my predicted grade.

Was I wrong to do this? Any student across the country could do it. The teacher and other students obviously didn't know about this. It's caused me to have some sleepless nights hahaha

There's nothing wrong with using all the resources available to you. You didn't obtain the test unfairly and all students had the same opportunity, thus what you did is not only good, but I'd even recommend it.

It's the teachers fault really, for not making a new test...

 

[maverick_starstrider]

My university keeps them all in the library.

It becomes a problem when only specific people can access them because they are kept 'guarded' and only made available to those 'in the know' or 'with access' (which sounds like your case). However, I'd question whether they aren't kept for physics by choice or simply because they can't - that would change your situation from out of anyone's control to they chose not to now they have to live with it.


There's nothing wrong with it. Firstly, the teacher should know, it's not like they keep these things quiet. Secondly, any student could access them.

Given that everyone is on equal footing in that respect, I don't see a problem.

If you revise for a real exam and almost identical questions came up, you wouldn't think of that as cheating (I know it's slightly different but it's on the same lines).

I would say though, you can't rely on the result as an indication of your ability.

I'm not actually saying anything about the situation detailed here but I don't necessarily think it's all fair as long as a student "could" know of a given advantage. Like if it's never mentioned that a website for the exams even exists I could see that as unfair. It's like Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where the plans to demolish the Earth were on public record on some planet, so it's their fault for not bringing up a complaint at the appropriate time.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

No need to make generalizations about high school students. Crackpots exist in all age groups.

True, but I haven't met anyone out of high school who thought they were the ubermensch. I've never actually met a Sheldon Cooper.

 

[Monster92]

I'm not actually saying anything about the situation detailed here but I don't necessarily think it's all fair as long as a student "could" know of a given advantage. Like if it's never mentioned that a website for the exams even exists I could see that as unfair. It's like Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where the plans to demolish the Earth were on public record on some planet, so it's their fault for not bringing up a complaint at the appropriate time.

Yeah I can see where you're coming from. All people had to do was type the course name in google. It's possible that two other student were aware although I never asked. To be quite frank, I bet most students in that class would of cared or used the resources in the first place.

I do feel worried that I don't know my true ability. One of the exams is tomorrow wish me luck!

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Yeah I can see where you're coming from. All people had to do was type the course name in google. It's possible that two other student were aware although I never asked. To be quite frank, I bet most students in that class would of cared or used the resources in the first place.

I do feel worried that I don't know my true ability. One of the exams is tomorrow wish me luck!

Good luck!

 

[Haldhad]

I know this isn't addressed to me, but a test should measure the student's understanding of the course material. Period. If the student has a disability that affects his learning, that's unfortunate, but the test must remain an accurate measurement instead of being a random number generator.

Now, if the student has a disability that specifically prevents him from taking an exam, that's a different story. He might understand the material perfectly; he just has trouble demonstrating it in an exam setting. In that case, it's possible to accommodate him without compromising the accuracy of the test.

I don't disagree but you are missing my point, if you are saying that people who have comprehension issues are not disabled, that is just wrong, some people can't even see writing in the correct order without special glasses. So very wrong. If we're going to bar people on the basis of physiological issues in the brain then why not the blind, clearly someone taking the test in braile cannot read as fast as someone who is sighted. That is my point. Where do you draw the line?

Dyslexia not a real issue, well science would tell you that apart from a few fringe scientists it obviously exists.

My point wasn't about the OP it was about genuine disability. If he is shown to have genuine issue it should be catered for. This is not some elitist club where those who have all the right mental conditions should ignore all those who don't.

The fact is people who do have comprehension issues are given more time. If you have an issue with that perhaps you should take it up with the relevant authorities?

Yes it is possible to give everyone a level playing field, I quite agree. And so we should.

 

[micromass]

Dyslexia not a real issue, well science would tell you that apart from a few fringe scientists it obviously exists.

Could you give me a scientific paper that supports your claim that dyslexia is not a real issue?

 

[Haldhad]

No need to make generalizations about high school students. Crackpots exist in all age groups.

And sadly all levels of education from the high school student to the post doctorate. Still at least there's peer review. :)

 

[Geezer]

If you have an issue with that perhaps you should take it up with the relevant authorities?

Heck, physics is full of people who aren't "neuro-typical" (a word taught to me by the mother of an autistic boy). I'm willing to bet that there are many respected physicists, living and dead, who have Asperger's or are high-functioning autistic. If you read Dirac's biography, The Strangest Man, even the author suggests that Dirac had Asperger's.

 

[Haldhad]

Could you give me a scientific paper that supports your claim that dyslexia is not a real issue?

No that was my point, the idea that it is is fringe. But I can link you to some scientists claims that it is a myth but not for the reasons you might imagine. Which links nicely with the post above. No matter the level of education or age some people clearly are crackpots. Correct diagnosis is important, but using terms such as myth just make it harder for people to be diagnosed who clearly are dyslexic.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2005/sep/07/schools.uk

That link also links to a program on TV called the dyslexia myth.

 

[Haldhad]

Heck, physics is full of people who aren't "neuro-typical" (a word taught to me by the mother of an autistic boy). I'm willing to bet that there are many respected physicists, living and dead, who have Asperger's or are high-functioning autistic. If you read Dirac's biography, The Strangest Man, even the author suggests that Dirac had Asperger's.

Well Einstien was deemed remedial by his parents at age 8 because he couldn't converse very well with other people, they considered sending him to a special school. There's a difference between abilities that actually help and those that hinder. Although the fine line is exceptionally slim and hard to pin down.

I once met someone taught by Dirac at Cambridge. He said the guy was intimidating. He would often turn up to lectures, from both Professors at the university and guest speakers, and sit quietly 'til the end. Then in two or three questions he would utterly demolish their theories. He was the sort of person that would make smart people think they were stupid, within a few minutes of talking to him.

Put it this way no one wanted him to turn up to their lectures.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Heck, physics is full of people who aren't "neuro-typical" (a word taught to me by the mother of an autistic boy). I'm willing to bet that there are many respected physicists, living and dead, who have Asperger's or are high-functioning autistic. If you read Dirac's biography, The Strangest Man, even the author suggests that Dirac had Asperger's.

But there's no objective definition of Asperger's. Indeed there's no concrete support for autism having a spectrum at all. That's something of an unverified assumption. I'm not saying it's wrong but making social modifications before scientific verification is kind of putting the cart before the horse.

It's entirely possible (in fact it's almost a certainty) that legitimate neurological conditions exist beyond our ability to probe (i.e. fMRI). However, I'm always quite skeptical when we start handing out special treatment for mental "disorders". Schizophrenia? Bi-polar disorder? Those are legitimate deformities of the brain. You can spot them (the butterfly). Autism is clearly a disorder. However, this recent trend of co-oping personality into the department of disorder is mildly disturbing. Does someone just have an anxious personality or is some part of their brain legitimately different? How can you demonstrate that? Is it degenerative? Is there effective treatment? Hell no. So we should maybe think twice about rewriting laws and social expectations until we have something remotely concrete.