Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 cuda1179 wrote:
How about a psychiatrist having to constantly pull out the cheat sheets to remind him what to ask a patient?

Yes of course psychiatrists never have to consult a book. They have all the world's problems and solutions memorised perfectly and never make mistakes.
*Carefully pushes the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition under the Signless' desk*

 cuda1179 wrote:
No, just no. Let's say at your job your company has a financial windfall. upper management declares 200% raises for EVERYONE!!!, except you Peregrine, you can stay at your base pay. We aren't hurting you, we're just helping everyone else.

Except that's a terrible analogy because grades are capped at a maximum and there is no fixed supply of grade points to be divided up between the students. If I'm getting a 95+ on every test already then helping everyone else can, at best, bring them up to the same level as me. They aren't going to start getting 400s on every test. Nor do their improved grades come out of a scarce supply that could have been given to me, with the assumption being that I should have been given my share if someone else didn't take it first.

 skyth wrote:
I think I have another troll going on ignore.

Someone confronted with the truth that hides their head in the sand rather than debate the topic.

Do you beleive the open book tests discriminate against men?

Is it harder for men to pass open book tests?

 the Signless wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
How about a psychiatrist having to constantly pull out the cheat sheets to remind him what to ask a patient?

Yes of course psychiatrists never have to consult a book. They have all the world's problems and solutions memorised perfectly and never make mistakes.
*Carefully pushes the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition under the Signless' desk*

Yeah, I'm not sure where this "imagine having to consult a book" thing comes from. Pulling out a book to look something up is just standard practice. You don't want to have to do it in an emergency situation, but if you're an engineer/lawyer doing pre-trial research/etc you have plenty of time to look stuff up and get it right instead of depending on fallible memory.

My job exists because I know how to read the damn book.

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
No, just no. Let's say at your job your company has a financial windfall. upper management declares 200% raises for EVERYONE!!!, except you Peregrine, you can stay at your base pay. We aren't hurting you, we're just helping everyone else.

Except that's a terrible analogy because grades are capped at a maximum and there is no fixed supply of grade points to be divided up between the students. If I'm getting a 95+ on every test already then helping everyone else can, at best, bring them up to the same level as me. They aren't going to start getting 400s on every test. Nor do their improved grades come out of a scarce supply that could have been given to me, with the assumption being that I should have been given my share if someone else didn't take it first.

You are criticizing the hypothetical without addressing the problem. I'm not necessary stating that open-book tests, or indeed catering to girls learning needs, is bad. It's doing it while ignoring the needs of boys that is the problem.

 cuda1179 wrote:
You are criticizing the hypothetical without addressing the problem. I'm not necessary stating that open-book tests, or indeed catering to girls learning needs, is bad. It's doing it while ignoring the needs of boys that is the problem.

You know, when I had open-book tests I sure felt like my needs were being catered to. And last time I looked in my pants I was still a man.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Do you beleive the open book tests discriminate against men?

Is it harder for men to pass open book tests?

I believe that tests are a trial and challenge to see what you have learned and your ability to process that information. In the real world, yes TIME is important.

Not to throw out too many hypotheticals, but...... Imagine lifeguard certification. You can swim well under any condition and are sure to pass. When they see others in your class floundering in the water they decide that everyone now gets a life preserver before doing their testing. Did you really loose anything, no, technically not. However when everyone else is now considered equal to you there definitely is some proportional loss.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
You are criticizing the hypothetical without addressing the problem. I'm not necessary stating that open-book tests, or indeed catering to girls learning needs, is bad. It's doing it while ignoring the needs of boys that is the problem.

You know, when I had open-book tests I sure felt like my needs were being catered to. And last time I looked in my pants I was still a man.

Everyone give a big hand of congratulations to Peregrine for being an outlier. If girls need a hand-up in certain areas, and boys in others, why does only one get the help?

 cuda1179 wrote:
I believe that tests are a trial and challenge to see what you have learned and your ability to process that information. In the real world, yes TIME is important.

But timed tests and closed-book tests are not the same thing. You can have a timed open-book test. In fact, that's arguably the ideal solution: you don't have time to finish the test if you aren't prepared for it and have to desperately look up everything and learn as you go, but you aren't completely screwed if you understand how to solve each problem but made a mistake in remembering one equation. The only downside is that setting the time limit is an art, and it's very easy for a less-skilled teacher to set it badly.

Not to throw out too many hypotheticals, but...... Imagine lifeguard certification. You can swim well under any condition and are sure to pass. When they see others in your class floundering in the water they decide that everyone now gets a life preserver before doing their testing. Did you really loose anything, no, technically not. However when everyone else is now considered equal to you there definitely is some proportional loss.

But why do I care about this "loss"? I still got my certification, why does it matter if other people get theirs?

And, again, your analogy is bad. Being unable to swim without a life preserver makes you unqualified to be a lifeguard. Being unable to remember every single detail for a test doesn't necessarily make you unqualified for the job you're aiming for, since it's very likely that you'll have books/internet searches/etc to reference in the real world.

Everyone give a big hand of congratulations to Peregrine for being an outlier. If girls need a hand-up in certain areas, and boys in others, why does only one get the help?

I seriously doubt I'm an outlier. Other (male) students I've talked to have similar opinions about open-book tests. For example, in a programming class I just took we were offered a choice of open-book or closed-book. And somehow, despite there only being a single woman in the class of 10ish students, the vote for an open-book test was unanimous.

The only bias in examinations (in this context) is that they cater to people who are prepared for them, shocking I know.

Doesn't matter if they're closed/open/whatever, if you've revised and done all the things they want you to do, then you're more likely to pass than the person who hasn't regardless of gender.

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

Not to throw out too many hypotheticals, but...... Imagine lifeguard certification. You can swim well under any condition and are sure to pass. When they see others in your class floundering in the water they decide that everyone now gets a life preserver before doing their testing. Did you really loose anything, no, technically not. However when everyone else is now considered equal to you there definitely is some proportional loss.

But why do I care about this "loss"? I still got my certification, why does it matter if other people get theirs?

And, again, your analogy is bad. Being unable to swim without a life preserver makes you unqualified to be a lifeguard. Being unable to remember every single detail for a test doesn't necessarily make you unqualified for the job you're aiming for, since it's very likely that you'll have books/internet searches/etc to reference in the real world.

Everyone give a big hand of congratulations to Peregrine for being an outlier. If girls need a hand-up in certain areas, and boys in others, why does only one get the help?

I seriously doubt I'm an outlier. Other (male) students I've talked to have similar opinions about open-book tests. For example, in a programming class I just took we were offered a choice of open-book or closed-book. And somehow, despite there only being a single woman in the class of 10ish students, the vote for an open-book test was unanimous.

If they trained 10 lifeguards and only had three positions open, and you all got a passing grade due to the life vests.....I'm sure you would be concerned. There are several jobs out there where inherent knowledge of a situation is significantly better than general knowledge with a book on hand. I'd rather have the total expert that knows things like the back of their hand....with the book on hand just in case.


Would you have been graded differently in that programming class if you did or did not have the book? Really this point is moot as well and is a major strawman. It's basically a settled fact that open book tests disproportionately help women.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Would you have been graded differently in that programming class if you did or did not have the book?

No, because everyone got the same test under the same conditions. It was a class vote between a harder test that was open-book, or an easier closed-book test. And the unanimous vote was for the open-book test. So clearly I am not an outlier, and there are lots of men who believe they benefit from having an open-book test.

Really this point is moot as well and is a major strawman. It's basically a settled fact that open book tests disproportionately help women.

But "disproportionately help women" and "don't help men" are not at all the same thing. If replacing a closed-book test with an open-book test gives +10 points to men and +12 points to women it's still giving a significant benefit to men, especially in cases (such as the engineering department) where passing the class at all is what matters, and how well you do relative to the other students is a distant secondary concern at best.

 cuda1179 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

Not to throw out too many hypotheticals, but...... Imagine lifeguard certification. You can swim well under any condition and are sure to pass. When they see others in your class floundering in the water they decide that everyone now gets a life preserver before doing their testing. Did you really loose anything, no, technically not. However when everyone else is now considered equal to you there definitely is some proportional loss.

But why do I care about this "loss"? I still got my certification, why does it matter if other people get theirs?

And, again, your analogy is bad. Being unable to swim without a life preserver makes you unqualified to be a lifeguard. Being unable to remember every single detail for a test doesn't necessarily make you unqualified for the job you're aiming for, since it's very likely that you'll have books/internet searches/etc to reference in the real world.

Everyone give a big hand of congratulations to Peregrine for being an outlier. If girls need a hand-up in certain areas, and boys in others, why does only one get the help?

I seriously doubt I'm an outlier. Other (male) students I've talked to have similar opinions about open-book tests. For example, in a programming class I just took we were offered a choice of open-book or closed-book. And somehow, despite there only being a single woman in the class of 10ish students, the vote for an open-book test was unanimous.

If they trained 10 lifeguards and only had three positions open, and you all got a passing grade due to the life vests.....I'm sure you would be concerned. There are several jobs out there where inherent knowledge of a situation is significantly better than general knowledge with a book on hand. I'd rather have the total expert that knows things like the back of their hand....with the book on hand just in case.

Would you have been graded differently in that programming class if you did or did not have the book? Really this point is moot as well and is a major strawman. It's basically a settled fact that open book tests disproportionately help women.

How is this a settled fact? All that you have said in support of this statement is that there are studies that you cannot remember that supposedly support your claim. Considering that other times when you have posted links to research they did not support your claims, I see no reason to believe this claim without some good evidence.

Also, you are using the word "strawman" wrong.

If I'm studying law, how is having an open-book test going to help me if I don't already know what I'm looking for and where? I just checked, the Swedish lawbook is almost as thick as a Bloodthirster is high!

 the Signless wrote:
[

How is this a settled fact? All that you have said in support of this statement is that there are studies that you cannot remember that supposedly support your claim. Considering that other times when you have posted links to research they did not support your claims, I see no reason to believe this claim without some good evidence.

Also, you are using the word "strawman" wrong.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If I'm studying law, how is having an open-book test going to help me if I don't already know what I'm looking for and where? I just checked, the Swedish lawbook is almost as thick as a Bloodthirster is high!

That's it? Be thankful it's that short. That would be an abridged edition of American law.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I'd love for a lawyer to stand up in court and say "objection your Honor. I know that line of questioning is illegal...... I just can't remember the right being violated or the legal precedence in case law. Give me a few minutes to look it up".

Lawyer here. That's exactly what happens, for everything beyond the most basic of standard evidentiary & procedural rules.

You'll never read anything that makes you want to kill yourself quite as much as a NATOPS manual, which you pretty much have to memorize.

I have no idea what we're now talking about in this thread.

 d-usa wrote:
My job exists because I know how to read the damn book.

Based on new found evidence in this thread. I demand you throw away your Nursing Drug Handbook 2016 and tell me the generic names of Nexium, what it is used to treat, and the side effects of the drug.

You have 5 minutes. THE TIMER IS COUNTING!

Seaward wrote:


I have no idea what we're now talking about in this thread.

... Yeah, think we're done here then.