|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,613
Loc: 613
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: topdog82]
#21440812 - 03/21/15 07:45 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
topdog82 said: I am personally taking comp science and comp eng classes. Can't decide which major to take up
Im surpised you haven't had a hard curve. The curve is such that the average grade becomes a C, maybe a B- or a B+ depending on the school and dififuclty of the course etc.
I assume our courses must be similar
I have not encountered the term, but in most of my courses they also seem to aim for about a C average and usually end up doing a small (linear) bump upwards at the end of the course. Generally though the exams are not set up in such a way that most students would have trouble even finishing all the questions, and this is the part that I think sounds like a stupid evaluation method. It may be different in e.g. the engineering faculty, they seem to set everything up to put students under the maximum amount of pressure.
|
AGUARES



Registered: 02/16/15
Posts: 107
Last seen: 4 months, 29 days
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: All We Perceive]
#21441084 - 03/21/15 09:04 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
All We Perceive said: Hmmmm, now that I think about it more, I think my undergrad use of the drugs was more related to being able to cram a lot of information in short term memory which helped balance my absurd level of partying. That said, I do not think the drugs aid in long term memory recollection, which is the memory type needed on the exams I took. I knew the information way better with a long term study regiment when the exam came around. However, all of my exams in grad school were a single exam at the end of the semester, which was the entire grade for the class.
Your point about drugs freeing up spare time to put towards other things like a job is an interesting one. I think someone could ostensibly study with drugs for a quarter semester exam over the couple nights prior to the exam and dominate it better than someone without drugs could in the same situation. So do we then say that someone with rich parents who pay for school, creating the ability to just study without the distraction of a job is acting unethically when they accept their parents' money? Surely there are people that have to have a job and that impacts their study regiment. My grad school forbid people working their first year so that kind of ameliorated that issue but it's interesting nonetheless.
Have any of you heard of ampakines? they supposedly enhance attention span and alertness, and facilitate learning and memory. If these drugs are in fact being distributed throughout colleges I would wonder how much of an edge users have to those using addys or coke for studying...
--------------------
|
Konyap

Registered: 06/30/07
Posts: 33,945
Loc: Planet Piss
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: AGUARES]
#21441173 - 03/21/15 09:25 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
not having a job increases all of that holy shit having time to bullshit and rest
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: psi]
#21441177 - 03/21/15 09:26 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Stupid is an academic handicap.
--------------------
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,613
Loc: 613
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21441196 - 03/21/15 09:31 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Any particular reason you replied to my post?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: psi]
#21441198 - 03/21/15 09:32 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
None at all
--------------------
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,613
Loc: 613
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21441215 - 03/21/15 09:35 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Ok, just checking.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: psi]
#21441267 - 03/21/15 09:45 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I understand. The scroll thingy didn't go back to the OP so I just bailed on the reply to routine. Wasn't directed at you at all.
--------------------
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,613
Loc: 613
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: zappaisgod]
#21441286 - 03/21/15 09:51 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Cool, I gotcha.
|
topdog82
Death Spirit



Registered: 07/16/10
Posts: 7,992
Loc: California
Last seen: 9 days, 7 hours
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: All We Perceive]
#21441337 - 03/21/15 10:06 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
All We Perceive said: That's a tough question. Coffee/exercise/sleep/good nutrition are important to do well for me. These things are also accessible to all other students at their leisure. For me, I didn't find adderall/ritalin to be particularly effective for learning A LOT of information. I would crash after the end and burn a bunch of time not really processing anything. I found I could do better without using them with a proper study regiment. I used them a lot in undergrad though where it was a lot more rote low key memorization and regurgitate. It's easy to make a bagillion note cards on adderall all night. I think that the drugs are so ubiquitous in a competitive school setting and easy to get that the advantage is less than getting a huge extra block of time. It's also good for studying something super fucking boring to keep your attention. However, not everyone has access to these drugs and it they no doubt benefit some, so I would say that the drugs are also unethical in a competitive setting.
Quote:
All We Perceive said: Hmmmm, now that I think about it more, I think my undergrad use of the drugs was more related to being able to cram a lot of information in short term memory which helped balance my absurd level of partying. That said, I do not think the drugs aid in long term memory recollection, which is the memory type needed on the exams I took. I knew the information way better with a long term study regiment when the exam came around. However, all of my exams in grad school were a single exam at the end of the semester, which was the entire grade for the class.
Your point about drugs freeing up spare time to put towards other things like a job is an interesting one. I think someone could ostensibly study with drugs for a quarter semester exam over the couple nights prior to the exam and dominate it better than someone without drugs could in the same situation. So do we then say that someone with rich parents who pay for school, creating the ability to just study without the distraction of a job is acting unethically when they accept their parents' money? Surely there are people that have to have a job and that impacts their study regiment. My grad school forbid people working their first year so that kind of ameliorated that issue but it's interesting nonetheless.
Interesting take on both
I personally think that for nontechnical majors, adderall does wonders. I have not tried adderall in an computer science setting but I think it seriously deteriorates the idea of fair competition imo. I researched adderal and ritalin heavily when I was prescribed it for a year. It DEF enhances long term memory. It helps with rote memorization. But i have not tried it for a test that requires critical thinking on the spot
And regarding the original question of the thread: I dont think its fair game. I wont take the provisions
On a side note, I think laws need to be put in place to FURTHER support college students such that a job isnt needed. I have no job, but many others do. I feel like its a truly unfair disadvantage
|
TheMovement
faeirie princess in training



Registered: 07/30/12
Posts: 6,781
Loc: Under your bed.
Last seen: 2 years, 9 months
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: topdog82]
#21441447 - 03/21/15 10:42 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
topdog82 said:
Quote:
All We Perceive said: That's a tough question. Coffee/exercise/sleep/good nutrition are important to do well for me. These things are also accessible to all other students at their leisure. For me, I didn't find adderall/ritalin to be particularly effective for learning A LOT of information. I would crash after the end and burn a bunch of time not really processing anything. I found I could do better without using them with a proper study regiment. I used them a lot in undergrad though where it was a lot more rote low key memorization and regurgitate. It's easy to make a bagillion note cards on adderall all night. I think that the drugs are so ubiquitous in a competitive school setting and easy to get that the advantage is less than getting a huge extra block of time. It's also good for studying something super fucking boring to keep your attention. However, not everyone has access to these drugs and it they no doubt benefit some, so I would say that the drugs are also unethical in a competitive setting.
Quote:
All We Perceive said: Hmmmm, now that I think about it more, I think my undergrad use of the drugs was more related to being able to cram a lot of information in short term memory which helped balance my absurd level of partying. That said, I do not think the drugs aid in long term memory recollection, which is the memory type needed on the exams I took. I knew the information way better with a long term study regiment when the exam came around. However, all of my exams in grad school were a single exam at the end of the semester, which was the entire grade for the class.
Your point about drugs freeing up spare time to put towards other things like a job is an interesting one. I think someone could ostensibly study with drugs for a quarter semester exam over the couple nights prior to the exam and dominate it better than someone without drugs could in the same situation. So do we then say that someone with rich parents who pay for school, creating the ability to just study without the distraction of a job is acting unethically when they accept their parents' money? Surely there are people that have to have a job and that impacts their study regiment. My grad school forbid people working their first year so that kind of ameliorated that issue but it's interesting nonetheless.
Interesting take on both
I personally think that for nontechnical majors, adderall does wonders. I have not tried adderall in an computer science setting but I think it seriously deteriorates the idea of fair competition imo. I researched adderal and ritalin heavily when I was prescribed it for a year. It DEF enhances long term memory. It helps with rote memorization. But i have not tried it for a test that requires critical thinking on the spot
And regarding the original question of the thread: I dont think its fair game. I wont take the provisions
On a side note, I think laws need to be put in place to FURTHER support college students such that a job isnt needed. I have no job, but many others do. I feel like its a truly unfair disadvantage
Everything is fair game my friend. There are so many people on adderall in a university setting, it's not even funny. Anything you can use to enhance your mental prowess is fair game, unless you get caught. Exercise increases brain power. Your diet, state of mind, sex-life also affect your mental prowess. Where are you going to draw the line? Who gets to take what? What makes it ok for one person to take drug X over another person? If you are naturally smarter than someone, is it fair for them to be prescribed adderall and get higher scores than you? There is no line to draw.
We constantly ingest substances that alter our chemical make-up slightly, changing the way we think, breathe, feel etc., You are obligated to do what you have to do to be the best person you can be, in whatever way you feel is right.
-------------------- Utwiddle.net In order to act like a king, one need only treat everyone else like one. BUMP THIS THREAD EVERYTIME YOU SEE IT Join the Anarchy Camp! Down with Oppression!!
|
OliverJames
Potion Brewer

Registered: 02/28/12
Posts: 3,085
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: All We Perceive]
#21441559 - 03/21/15 11:35 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
All We Perceive said:
Quote:
psi said:
Quote:
All We Perceive said: Extra time for "ADHD" in a hard curve class is the biggest crock of shit I've ever heard. I was so fucking pissed that people went and got diagnosed ADHD to get additional time on the exams.
Why, were you finding yourself that you didn't have enough time to finish? If not, what does this have to do with you?
IMO exams should be about demonstrating knowledge anyway, not speed. Extra time does not give you any advantage as far as knowing the material, you either know it or you don't. If the students who work the slowest can't demonstrate their knowledge because the time limit is too short, that's fucking bullshit. Ideally the time limit for everyone would be long enough that nobody would need "extra" time, but for various reasons (e.g. staffing) that's not how they have it set up, so if you are one of the people who does run out of time on exams, you have to jump through administrative hoops for the time you need. Meanwhile, there will be other students who studied no harder than you but finished early.
We're not talking about just learning material and getting the grade we get. If that's the case, fine, be a pussy and take all the extra time you need. We are talking about a hard curve where by netting yourself extra time, you have a concrete advantage over other students who don't cry for more time. I don't know what classes you've taken with a hard curve, but most of the time, the test is designed so you barely have enough time to finish or you don't finish at all. Such a test utilizes critical reasoning skills and isn't merely some psychology 101 exam where they make you spit out the most basic information from memory. Even if it was a really basic test, additional time will allow you to massage your memory until you remember what you couldn't in the allotted normal time period. Your reasoning sounds like you are one of those people that cry when they don't get a participation trophy.
I agree with everything you've said, but I think some blame for this has to be placed on the current education system and the method by which exams are administered
I've had many classes where a decent number of students could use an extra 20-30 mins. I'm not talking about an extra 1-2 hours, simply a bit more time. Depends on the class, but I've had some really ridiculous professors give huge exams in too short a time period. Peoples brains are designed differently, not everyone is born to sit in a class room for 2-3 hours taking an exam. Its not a disorder, its simply a difference in brain structure. Personally, I need more time on exams where I'm expected to write long passages. It's not about who is more intelligent or who understands the material better, I'm just not very quick when it comes to structuring my answers. Writing isn't my strong suit though, I'm much faster when it comes to mathematics.
Again, I'm not disagreeing with you, going and getting diagnosed with ADD just to receive more time on exams and then bragging about ones grade is bullshit. But, I totally understand why some people do it, and I don't blame them at all. I've worked in my field before, and it is nothing like taking an exam in college. Comparing ones ability to finish a 2-3 hour exam in a short time period to how one performs on the job is ridiculous.
I just can't stand the current education system, but I don't really have a better alternative unfortunately
|
psi
TOAST N' JAM


Registered: 09/05/99
Posts: 31,613
Loc: 613
|
Re: Would it be unfair to take up academic handicaps? [Re: OliverJames]
#21441736 - 03/22/15 01:27 AM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
There really would be no fairness issue around extra time if the testing strategy wasn't to give people less time than they need in the first place. As you're saying, it's not really a complete reflection of how you would perform in real-world situations either. It seems like there is this attitude though that if a bunch of students crash hard, it must be a good and fair test that's a complete reflection of ability in the subject.
Quote:
All We Perceive said: Even if it was a really basic test, additional time will allow you to massage your memory until you remember what you couldn't in the allotted normal time period.
What it will not help you to do though is remember things that you didn't manage to learn in the first place. If someone who knows more of the material but writes more slowly gets the same mark as someone who knows a lot less of the material but writes at "normal" speed, I would say the marks are not really reflective of merit. It's easier to mark exams with a bunch of blank spaces though.
|
|