Point deduction

Based on points made in previous rounds I will introduce no further arguments just comment and clarify when needed, see the end for a summary. "I should note while Con says it is 6 times more complex, this is wrong." My point here was simple, under the current system a student can look at a question and do a trivial calculation to determine if it is worth attempting a question if they are uncertain. However, in the proposed system they have to do multiple calculations and then attempt a comparison. During a test, with time pressing, these trivial calculations may not be such and if a student makes a mistake they may end up attempting a question they should not. Paradoxical to the intent, a lot of students will end up not doing these calculations and just guessing if they should attempt the question, this is the very thing the system is supposed to prevent. "I think it's reasonable that guesses below that percent do not really constitute firm knowledge." I would agree, but I would ask the simple question - if a student was 30% certain of the material in a course what mark should they get - is there no reward for anything which is not firm knowledge? Under the proposed replacement system if they attempted the questions they would most likely get them wrong and end up with zero, what message does this send to students - if you can not learn something to certainty then do not learn it at all and leave out the question as you will get a much better mark. Is that really the message a teacher should send to students? "Con contradicts himself somewhat here. In his previous round he claimed one need only know 20% of the content and now says one needs to know 85% of the content." Those were two different assertions, the were comparing what is needed to pass if all questions were attempted vs the minimum amount of right answers needed with everything else left blank. My point was that this is insanely imbalanced system no matter which way it is examined and the fact that you are given two extremely different numbers is more proof of this imbalance. "Point deduction is particularly geared towards eliminating gains from guessing, which is more likely at lower levels of testing and lower levels of student effort, both of which are less common with post secondary teaching." In secondary schools there are a lot of courses taken just as prerequisites and often students are just looking for a pass/credit. In first year physics for example students will usually ignore torque unless they are intending to do physics as a major/minor as it is the most demanding concept and thus they won't even attempt to learn it and just guess at the answers, similar examples can be given for other courses. "Also, my opponent says that if a student answers every question wrong they get a negative mark, which is incorrect. The total mark is total rank (ie. Ranks added together) * 2.5 . The total losable marks = 2.5 * total rank." To clarify, this was in response to the comment about balancing the system. The current scheme has a student get 60% if they just leave out every question and with the pass mark is 65% this is obviously a problem. But it is not trivial to devise a formula which will "curve" the marks and not generate someone getting negative marks if they attempt all questions, Pro certaintly did not provide one only imply that "the details could be worked out". "However, this is no different to the current system! Teachers simply revise the ‘marks' given in a question vs. ‘ranks'." Yes, it is simply more complicated due to the calculations required. Again, look at the current system and what a teacher has to do to decide if a question should effect the pass fail point on an exam, which any committed teacher should do. Then look at the machinations they have to do under the current system, it is far more complicated and sample calculations have been provided in the above. "Rather, I advocate improving one's chances where I can, instead of acting upon lower percentage chances." Ok, but here is the thing, you are in a test, you don't have any ability at that point to improve on anything - you just have the chance to show what you know. It is not as if I would argue students should not learn, but simply that a test should not discourage students from proving all the information they do learn so a full assessment can be given. "Con's system definitely has a variety of strengths and such, and I consider it a marked improvement on the current system. Unfortunately, Con is not defending such a system, although I believe such a system would also do to be implemented if point deduction was not." Comments were made to discuss alternates to provide more a more in depth argument as to why point deduction is in general a bad thing as it discourages students from sharing information. In any classes I have ever taught one of the things I made sure to do was produce an environment where students were free and confident to express any ideas they had, on a test or not, this meant that I had the fullest understanding of their strengths and weakness and could teach accordingly. When I had the maximum understanding of what they knew I was at maximum effect as a teacher. I was extremely demanding, workloads were high consistently, the last courses I taught were calculus based introductory physics and I had two tests every week, one random, two assignments every week, a lab every week - and with all of this student feedback was consistently high[1]. I achieved this level of interaction and corresponding performance by creating an atmosphere where students knew that even the attempt at a solution would be rewarded even if, in the words of one student, "the answer is completely borked". My perspective which comes from my view as an experimental physicist is that all attempts, even failures, are critical to learning and everything I did as a teacher was to foster learning. In short, the opening refutations have not been refuted and I have given a proposed counter scheme which will maximize feedback to the instructor and maximize rewards to the students. [1] http://www.ratemyprofessors.com... (no reptoids were harmed during this debate)