Exams

Post Reply New Topic

@Kalister1: I need extended time too, as*hole. >_>

Oh, exams make me miserable...-_-

I get so fed up of people telling me to revise. It's not that simple, seriously. Me, I can't always understand the question. I'm too logical. Laugh if you may, but when a question says "How much can you learn from...?", my immediate thought is "Well, a paragraph is how much". Which is not what they're asking, I /know/, I just can't work out what they ARE asking.

My school do know about the AS which is kind of useful...I get extra time, which I think is quite helpful..means I get more time to sit and think what the question is /actually/ asking.

Got GCSEs for the next few weeks...Two tomorrow, one on Friday, one next week, one week after

Good luck to everyone else

Well, the problem with that is you are competing for a very few spots, and you only get a limited amount of time. It is testing just how good you are at your subject. It wouldn't be fair if you get more time than the other students, who are also competing for the same spots.

Anyone can solve anything given enough time. Can you solve it in a VERY limited amount of time? The amount of study required goes up exponentially with each period of time shaved off, and it means you really know your subject, enough so you have near instant recall of anything from the entire course.

This also leads to smaller class sizes, and more dedicated professors, as many of the people who can't cope with this quickly drop. The professors who do this kind of weeding out usually do it because "they want to make sure all students who take them KNOW their subject", in other words they don't want you getting into the next class with only a limited command of the subject.

If you are able to do timed tests quickly, this means that the professor can also teach faster. Those who can't do it quickly are left at the wayside, allowing the rest of the class to progress at the required speed.

I just like to know that I don't need anything to help me, any crutch, as I find pushing myself harder and harder against a time limit is the best way to learn. I don't want anyone coming by later and said "oh, but you got extra time on the test!". Extra time on some of the tests I have taken is the difference between a C and an A, so it really does matter.

Its not being an as*hole. Its being fair to all the students, who are all competing for a select number of spots. If everyone got an A (grade inflation), then there would be no way to weed out the bad students from the good students when the receiving school reviews that transfer paper.

It's NOT fair to people with learning disabilities, as we don't process things the same, so it takes longer to do the same thing

Well, people with Aspergers have been said to have very high IQ's, and an IQ test is very similar (timed logic problems) to a mathematics tests.

Should someone with less IQ get more time? No, they shouldn't even be in the class, but they still have more of a disability in cognitive ability than someone with Aspergers, who is in the class and who might even be considered to have an advantage. (Some people have raised the point that many people with Aspergers have incredible amounts of concentration, and have above average skills when applying logic to derive a solution from complex problems)

The whole point is that it isn't supposed to be fair. I know thats hard to hear, but should someone who is less smart get more time because it isn't fair that the other students are smarter? Thats my own opinion, and I grant you yours; these are just my responses to them in my head, responses that I have been debating with myself for some time.

A test is meant to test you on your ability to do something. If you can't do it well, then you can do something else. We all have our strengths and weaknesses, and I'm sure there is something you can do far better than me. I wouldn't want an advantage though, because we are being tested, and the point of the test is to show that you are obviously better than me in that regard (Its very hard to find an analogy in real life , because many professors hold beliefs that would frankly shock you, completely not egalitarian. They want to pretty much weed out those who can't cope, take no prisoners. I've had a Poli Sci, a Computer Science, an astronomy professor all like that. You complain, they'll laugh in your face and give you an F.)

The root of all this is they have a reputation to protect; they don't want to send you off to the next class and have that professor complain about your ability to do the work. This is how the grading system works

Last edited by Kalister1 on 04 Jun 2008, 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Okay, but do try to not make your opinion final, as every day things change, and your opinions need to update with them.

I'm not talking about IQ. Somebody can have a extremely high IQ and still need more time because of a learning disability.
In the case you're talking about, it's not about how much you know a subject, it's just how good your memory is. I have a crappy memory, but I am very smart. 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4 in this case

I never said that, re-read it and you'll see. If you want to use that argument to brush aside mine, then I can simply use it the same to you, and as you can see, its value as a conjecture is negligible

Actually, that might not be true. People with high IQ's are able to access information very quickly, and can logically compute VERY fast. The whole point of an IQ test is that it is timed. Memory is usually the same for most people, and if you put in the hard work (studying), then you can be just as good as anyone else.

Yes, memory and computation are BOTH tested on tests. Its mastery of the subject, which includes how fast you can do it. Someone can figure out a logic problem given a day, but we need someone who can figure it out in 5 minutes, GO!

The whole point is that your transcript will be better than someone who actually has a better command of the subject, which is NOT FAIR AT ALL. I just don't want someone to ever come to me and say "You had a crutch, I was the better man"

I did read your post, and that's how I saw it. I'm not trying to pick a fight and I'm really not in the mood for it.
I'm saying what my opinion is, you can have yours, but please don't discredit mine.

Sorry, no. Timed exams don't test how good you are at your subject, they test how good you are at taking timed exams in that subject. HUGE difference.

You'll find that in the real world, very, very few people actually care about so-called "instant recall" of facts. Even in academia (actually, especially in academia) you'll have a hard time finding professors who say they'd rather their students be able to work exams faster, as opposed to being able to think critically or creatively.

I do agree about having high standards and all that, and I dislike grade inflation just as much. But there's an enormous difference between high standards and arbitrary/capricious standards. Someone who has a learning disability (LD) who knows just as much on the subject matter as a non-LD person should get roughly the same grades the non-LD person would.

It's not about giving people who are not as smart an unfair advantage, it's about evening the playing field by negating the unfair advantage that non-LD people have, that they're better able to communicate what they know on timed exams.

And I might point out, it is pretty offensive to suggest that people with LD and receiving extra time aren't as smart, or that their accommodations aren't fair.

As you can see, I posted mine first, and responded to someone, and then you came off saying its not fair. Honestly, its the most fair, but it all hinges on how you view yourself:

1. Do you view yourself as needing help?

or

2. Do you throw off anyones help, and choose to go it alone, as you know you are better than anyone else even if you have a disability. Studying, hard work, and dedication can take you a long way.

I just don't want to ever need anyones help, or have it on my conscience that I needed someone to say "Kalister, here is extra time".

Call it a Nietzschean perspective. We're not all equal, but through hard work you can rise up above everyone else, and you don't need help from anyone. Even if you can't do that, you can still say "I did it all on my own, and look how high I got!"

I also got some of my Objectivist professors views rubbed off on me. They mostly seem to be the ones that give the hardest tests.

I do agree with this - I am in a program that many people who are good at timed tests tried out to get into, but they didn't get in because they aren't creative enough.

I don't think you have a learning disorder, as you don't understand what it's like. I take my extra time because I need it. I cannot finish a test without it, even though I know the material.

In all honesty , it may not matter.

The material these professors put on the test can be so esoteric, that if you don't know it you DONT KNOW IT. Extra time or no extra time, you're still done for.

P.S. : Anyone else love extra credit questions which ask you something from an obscure portion of the book? I love when I get those, because I'm just like *BAM* "The Universe is expanding!"
or something similar

I had a teacher that loves to take questions that he has explained explicitly in class (i.e. the way I have learned them) then place new criteria in them and twist them so far outside of the original problem that they are new questions....

My LD is this... I see the information for the original problem and have near photographic recall of the old problem... so much so that it interferes with doing the test problem.... along with the fact that his tests are printed in size 10 black font very close together,

I had problems simply reading the darn material, I needed extra time on his tests, simply to have time to re-sort through the extra information in my brainbut couldn't get it because I am not yet Dx'd officially.

Does this mean I didn't have as firm a grasp on the material as others? maybe, maybe not. But written tests are static and subject to interpretation by the reader.... I know If I had had a verbal test I would have had a better grade in that class, simply because I could have asked questions to clarify what they meant by certain things....

I passed the class, but my grade was lower, and I was operating at a higher stress level than most of his students. I know for darn sure I was studying harder than the people who made the same grade that I did.

*nods* This is what's been happening in my science class. I've had sooooooooooooo much crap in my life right now, and I just can't focus on this boring subject, making my marks drop!! !
I studied so hard though, but my mind wasn't there!

Ask anyone who knows me and they'll say I study, easily, for 4-5 hours a day.

I've always felt it to be take no prisoners. I don't even like asking questions in class

Thing is on many exams, the difficulty is based on it being timed. Many tests are designed so you DONT have enough time to do it all, and then its graded on a curve. It isn't fair to the other students.

I think we both have different philosophies in this. My philosophy is that you rise above the limitations nature has put on you, and always strive for the top, and never take help. Here is a good overview of it:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pilLBcdSMI[/youtube]

Last edited by Kalister1 on 05 Jun 2008, 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.