In the past 24 hours I've polished off two more exams, and the difference between them I have to say is remarkable. Both of them were worth 40% of the final grade in the respective courses. Both of them were 3rd year level courses. Both of them are targetted at more or less the same stream of students. And yet, one professor writes his exam as 2 hours worth of writing in a 3 hour period with clearly worded questions, asking for exactly what he wants to see in the answers. And the other designs the exam such that there is 4 hours of writing to be accomplished in 3 hours, with vaguely worded questions, and concepts barely touched upon in lectures, and not touched upon in the course text or handouts. It almost becomes an exercise in metacognition rather than knowing the course material you've supposedly been taught, an exercise in mind-reading.
What is the need for obscure references and vaguely worded inquiries when you're looking for a direct response? I've seen the same out of a couple assignments this term as well, but given the time to prod the prof for their exact meaning you can at least come up with something close to what he or she is looking for. On the other hand, in a strict time managed environment, with no outside resources available, a student shouldn't be forced to sit there and guess at what the hell the professor in question wants to see. For all profs or future profs out there, if you want a direct answer, ask a direct question, don't expect students to be call answerers on a fucking psychic hotline.
No comments:
Post a Comment