Stan Brown wrote: > Herman Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in sci.stat.edu: > >Test for understanding, not for imitation of robots. Give > >a few multi-part problems, and be sure to give partial credit. > > Excellent advice. I do (try to) test for understanding, by posing > problems in real-world terms and seeing if the students know which > test or calculation to do in which circumstances. Calculators are > allowed for all work. And yes, I give partial credit where it's > warranted. On the other hand, I don't give credit where work is not > shown. In my view, the "right" answer is worthless if you can't > justify it. >
If there is a 'right' answer how do you justify not giving full credit for a 'right;' answer? For partial answers of course you need to see the work however if the answer is corret then unless you suspect cheating I cannot see how you cannot give full marks. This assumes there is an objective numerical or verbal result. > Someone else mentioned projects. Students do two in the semester, a > test of population proportion based on a sample of 100 and a larger > project of their own choosing. > > -- > Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA > http://oakroadsystems.com > My reply address is correct as is. The courtesy of providing a correct > reply address is more important to me than time spent deleting spam. -- ------------------ John Kane The Rideau Lakes, Ontario Canada ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =================================================================
