Mentioning religion while campaigning and pushing for a theocracy are about as related as calling yourself a democratic socialist while campaigning and pushing for a communist dictatorship.
Mentioning religion while campaigning and pushing for a theocracy are about as related as calling yourself a democratic socialist while campaigning and pushing for a communist dictatorship.
Getting points is not a reward for a right answer. It’s a consequence of a right answer. There is no judgement or personal opinion or generosity involved. Right answer implies points. Anything else is dishonest.
Answering the question as written is not playing language games. It is answering the question. If your question allows answers that don’t demonstrate what you want, then that means that you suck at language, not that your student is playing games. If the student is playing games as well, well students are allowed to have fun, and the screw up is still yours.
The language is very clear and the answers absolutely meet the requirement. The teacher does not get to withhold points because they’re embarrassed that they wrote a crappy question.
It’s not rewarding. It’s assigning points based on the completion of the task. This is math, it does not have to be warm and fuzzy touchy feely nonsense with room for interpretation. If you can’t write clear instructions for a math problem, that is on you. If you cannot communicate your expectations to your students, that is on you. This problem would be incredibly easy to redo so that this answer was not allowed.
Ask the question you want the answer to. If you can’t think of a good way to ask your question to get the answer you want, ask of a different question covering the same concepts. If you can’t do that, then maybe you shouldn’t be writing math exams.
Yeah, sure, it’s for a kid. But even for kids - especially, in fact - it’s important to stick by what you say. And that test question says “write a number with a 3 in the 10s place” or whatever, which they did.
Basic use of language is fine. When you’re teaching you define what it means to “solve” or “provide the answer to” 1 1 = _. For a young kid, this is through examples, and later on it might be with an explicit written definition.
And then the question says “solve the following”, which does not mean “write any true statement”, and so excludes 1 1 = 1 1 as a correct answer.
Yeah sure, the kid is probably being a smart ass in this case. So? It’s ok for a kid to pull one over on you occasionally. Do better with the language next time, and it won’t happen again.
Exam questions should be designed so that answers (that follow any instructions) demonstrate understanding. If they are not, that’s the exam’s fault, not the student’s, and so should have no impact on the grade.
In this case, the exam could verify understanding by either asking additional questions (in the number 123, what digit is in the tens place), and/or by modifying the existing questions to require circling the correct place or not using the specified number outside that place. But regardless, if an answer is correct, then it is correct.
I’d agree that it’s perfectly fine for a teacher to follow up with the student to make sure they know what they were expected to know. But they should not make the exam score itself dependent on the follow up.
The exam is over, the questions and answers were what they were, the student should not have to worry that they will have to continually resit exams as teachers decide that they didn’t like the questions that they asked.
Windows 11. It works, all my stuff works, it doesn’t bug me, and I don’t have to fiddle with it for other things to work.
Did the article actually say he accepted with thumbs up before? Thought it just said he’d accepted via text.
No. Most people are decent people, even the people with dumb political ideas.
You’re right, I can learn the basics of regex in 30 minutes. Then I can write my one regex. Then I can forget the basics of regex in 3 minutes, because regex’s syntax is random garbage that makes no intuitive sense, and I hate and suck at memorizing nonsense. Repeat every 4-16 months.
It’s true though that regex is entrenched enough that even if something is easier to read, it’s unlikely that it’ll replace regex any time soon. You’d need a couple big names to adopt it, then many years.
But if there’s a readable replacement that can convert to and from regex - well, screw it, I’m in. Even if I’m required to use regex in some program, if I can write something that makes sense without the requisite half hour of googling crap, I’ll just use it as a separate tool to make and read regex strings.