students editing output

[Richard Welty]

Another news article gets screwed up, and another reposting ...
Sorry if you've seen this before ...

> In article <2222 at brl-tgr.ARPA> gwyn at brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>) writes:
> >On student cheating:
> >
> 	.
> 	.
> 	.
> >only hurt themselves (unless the college stupidly grades on a
> >relative rather than an absolute basis).  Surely no sensible
> 	.
> 	.
> Uhh..hate to bring this up...but you ever hear of the phrase "curve"??
> Yes, they really do grade on a relative basis.
> 
> Personally, I don't believe in curves; if you only know 80% of the material,
> then you *don't* deserve an A, even if you're the highest grade in the
> class.  If the whole class blows an exam, then either everyone is a dunce,
> or--more likely--the instructor screwed up.  But that's not the way it
> works.

Uhh ... psychologists (who study testing theory, among other things) will
tell you that a test is designed to tell you what you want to know.  The
choice of grading technique is up to the author of the test.  Many
instructors deliberately give tough tests in order to spread the grades out
-- the better the spread, the more you know about how the students are doing.
The important thing is that the grading and testing techniques be fair, and
that the students understand what is going on.
-- 
				Rich Welty

	"P. D. Q.'s early infancy ended with a striking decision;
	at the age of three, P. D. Q. Bach decided to give up music"
			- Prof. Peter Schickele,
			from "The Definitive Biography of P. D. Q. Bach"

	CSNet:   weltyrp at rpics
	ArpaNet: weltyrp.rpics at csnet-relay
	UUCP:  seismo!rpics!weltyrp