Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I didn't look at it, took the challenge and gave it a lot of effort. I got a pretty bad mark and the rest of the class got top marks.

I am curious to know what conclusion you draw from the anecdote about the test?

Is it that you aren't good enough because you tried your best and failed?

Or is it that the test is a fallible instrument, designed by a human being who works within the constraints of an institution and has no choice but to treat education as if it is a magic juice that it's his job to squirt into the students heads and then administer tests to determine if the juice stuck there or leaked out, thereby identifying the defective and leaky craniums?

Or is it that you seemed out of touch with what every else intuitively understood? ie. That they're being evaluated and that a negative evaluation can have profound consequences for the rest of their life, regardless of if the testing procedure is fair or not?



It was a pretty tough assignment iirc. In my mind an assignments purpose is to learn - which I did from putting in the effort and then reviewing the solution after submitting.

You seem to be getting my point though - I would have rather failed than cheat.

I learned that people (even smart people - which my peers were) will cheat if its beneficial to them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: