|
Negligent posted:This happened at law school and it owns. Law schools can get away with this because it's in the interests of the legal profession to put up as many barriers to entry as possible. Same as with medical school. They maintain their income through exclusivity so it's only right for them to set whatever assessments they choose to meet this end.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 02:31 |
|
|
I had a group assignment where my group got to roleplay the World Bank in a MidEast politics simulation. It was three politics nerds flipping out for three weeks and was glorious. We managed to set up a Marshall Plan for Palestine. There was supposed to be a fourth guy but he never showed up. We later learned that he dropped uni that semester to go on Big Brother and was first evicted or some poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
He got full marks for his assesment didnt he?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:23
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:He got full marks for his assesment didnt he? Also his name was Albert Einstein
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:31
|
|
|
hooman posted:
Not really. I'd say a properly implemented tertiary education system would be a perfectly good way to train people for almost any profession. I'm sure it just a lovely student thing, I've seen a lot more lovely international students than local students in my course though. Probably because at the post grad level more of the locals are professionals who made a conscious decision to go back to uni and learn new skills while the typical international post grad seems to be here for a degree that isn't as worthless as the ones from their own country, and don't really care how they get is as long as they pass. This is coming from a business course, I know people doing science courses who haven't had an issue with them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Law schools can get away with this because it's in the interests of the legal profession to put up as many barriers to entry as possible. Same as with medical school. They maintain their income through exclusivity so it's only right for them to set whatever assessments they choose to meet this end. I don't agree with that characterisation. If filtering out the bads is a side effect of grading each person individually on their merit then I'm not complaining.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:37
|
|
|
Negligent posted:I don't agree with that characterisation. Surely you agree that a harsher, more gruelly assessment criteria has the effect of reducing overall successful graduate numbers, which by providing a limited supply of graduates into the system, has the convenient side effect of controlling supply in the profession and therefore controlling any threats to income growth?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:39
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:Not really. I'd say a properly implemented tertiary education system would be a perfectly good way to train people for almost any profession. I'm sure it just a lovely student thing, I've seen a lot more lovely international students than local students in my course though. Probably because at the post grad level more of the locals are professionals who made a conscious decision to go back to uni and learn new skills while the typical international post grad seems to be here for a degree that isn't as worthless as the ones from their own country, and don't really care how they get is as long as they pass. This is coming from a business course, I know people doing science courses who haven't had an issue with them. I agree with you in theory if the tertiary education system is free and well implemented it can be a very good tool for both providing skills for work and educating for research. This isn't the tertiary education system that we have at the moment. Where it's pay to win and the biggest barrier to success is financial/social.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
Smegmatron posted:This. Some people here are being very careful about what they are saying, but it is a fiction to state that the students alone do it as they're "lazy shits" as there is evidence that cheating is endemic in Chinese schooling for multiple cultural reasons (such as high demand, and belief in money for reward). We can explore this repeatedly, with for example the paid essay scandals, but to only look at Australian universities and say the issue is there with university fees starts to try to pin an issue solely on a locally sourced educations system that could be "resolved" through a policy change at Government level that we should fight for. It sounds a lot nicer and better but it's also as reductionist as people stating that all international students can't do the work. There isn't one "reason" for this trump answer, and in truth both sides have valid points. For anecdotal evidence we have this rather infamous case, which is one of many, but we could also get into some essays that may now be straight up ignored or racist for being analysis of the so called "Tiger Parents" of Chinese culture in certain social classes. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/10132391/Riot-after-Chinese-teachers-try-to-stop-pupils-cheating.html See also: discussing India while trying to avoid any mention of the caste system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
I don't think that's the actual bottleneck. in medicine and law graduate numbers far exceed available entry level positions. Most people actually like the no group work, 70-100% exams assessment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Surely you agree that a harsher, more gruelly assessment criteria has the effect of reducing overall successful graduate numbers, which by providing a limited supply of graduates into the system, has the convenient side effect of controlling supply in the profession and therefore controlling any threats to income growth? It also means that only the best students will graduate and be able to practice. That might not be necessary for all professions but I'd have a lot more confidence in, say, teachers knowing that you didn't simply need to spell your name right on the exam to get a teaching qualification. In humanities courses it mightn't be so important.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
The bottleneck in medicine is definitely at the internship level. Critical thinking and qualitative skills definitely have their place but rote learning was rightly used a little bit as a bottleneck in some biochemistry subjects I did. There seems to be a subset of students who are mysteriously incapable of rote learning and I wonder if they're actually able to acquire the knowledge base needed to work in any kind of technical field.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 08:57
|
|
|
Lid posted:Some people here are being very careful about what they are saying, but it is a fiction to state that the students alone do it as they're "lazy shits" as there is evidence that cheating is endemic in Chinese schooling for multiple cultural reasons (such as high demand, and belief in money for reward). We can explore this repeatedly, with for example the paid essay scandals, but to only look at Australian universities and say the issue is there with university fees starts to try to pin an issue solely on a locally sourced educations system that could be "resolved" through a policy change at Government level that we should fight for. It sounds a lot nicer and better but it's also as reductionist as people stating that all international students can't do the work. There isn't one "reason" for this trump answer, and in truth both sides have valid points. The only reason we have international students who can pay full fee without going through the standard assessment/entrance system is because the government allowed it. You attribute cheating to a social thing based on race rather than on circumstance, history or personal goal. That is being a loving racist. Is cheating endemic in Chinese schools compared to schools in other countries? How much did you cheat through school? Do you have any evidence that there is more cheating in Chinese schools and culture than there is in Australian culture and schools? What do you think creates this system of requirements to get extremely high marks, do you think it's the inaccessability of good education in China, do you not think that's ALSO A loving RESULT OF POLICY DECISIONS. That article proves nothing except that people get angry when expectations are changed suddenly. If a school in Australia never enforced a school uniform then suddenly enforced one before an exam and rejected entry to anyone who didn't conform to the uniform codes there'd be a loving riot as well wouldn't there. Christ you need to take a good hard look at your both sides are right racism and realise that you have some colonial as gently caress attitudes dude.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:04
|
|
|
70% exams can go straight to hell. It hinders creativity and imagination and basically lets people who cram textbooks in their head graduate with no applicable skills. Besides memorisation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
Negligent posted:law school ... owns. Anidav posted:70% exams can go straight to hell. It hinders creativity and imagination and basically lets people who cram textbooks in their head graduate with no applicable skills. Besides memorisation. e: exams definitely have a place but that place is not to eclipse every other piece of assessment by such a degree that they make any form of study which isn't cramming for the final worthless. BBJoey fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Oct 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:06
|
|
|
I think just about every exam we had in the masters program was open book. Memory be damned, if you can't remember the model, look it up. The book won't help beyond that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:09
|
|
|
hooman posted:The only reason we have international students who can pay full fee without going through the standard assessment/entrance system is because the government allowed it. You attribute cheating to a social thing based on race rather than on circumstance, history or personal goal. That is being a loving racist. This is a whole lot of moral relativism brushed up as being on the higher ground. If you want to yell about it being Chinese policy then yell about it also being Chinese policy, but the goalposts here were "it's Australian universities fault" so move those goalposts if you wish and discuss the cultural policy of Chinese education but don't act like your reponse is anything but not liking an answer and so the answer must have something inherently wrong with it. "That article proves nothing except that people get angry when expectations are changed suddenly. If a school in Australia never enforced a school uniform then suddenly enforced one before an exam and rejected entry to anyone who didn't conform to the uniform codes there'd be a loving riot as well wouldn't there." - This is some next level bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:14
|
|
|
hooman posted:The only reason we have international students who can pay full fee without going through the standard assessment/entrance system is because the government allowed it. You attribute cheating to a social thing based on race rather than on circumstance, history or personal goal. That is being a loving racist. I don't know about China, but my Indian housemate told me that most assignments over there allow you to just c/p poo poo off the internet, which I would consider cheating. It's obviously a social thing rather than a racial thing, but I'm not sure how else you can easily get the point across without bringing up their country of origin. Didn't that 4Corners investigation find that it was predominantly Chinese/Indian/SE Asian students paying for assignments?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:I think just about every exam we had in the masters program was open book. Memory be damned, if you can't remember the model, look it up. The book won't help beyond that. *prints entirety of austlii out, can't fit it through the door*
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
Here is an article on the same situation being replicated in the US: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2015/05/29/u-s-schools-expelled-8000-chinese-students-for-poor-grades-cheating/ It does conclude with this It also said the problem wasn’t just with Chinese students that chose to go to the U.S. “This is an issue not just about students in the U.S., but about the entire higher-education system in China,” said the unsigned commentary. http://guancha.gmw.cn/2015-05/28/content_15808821.htm
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:18
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:I think just about every exam we had in the masters program was open book. Memory be damned, if you can't remember the model, look it up. The book won't help beyond that. I've had a couple of take-home exams. That's just asking for people to pay to have it done for them. It was in an entry level business law subject that the university decided the fail rate was too high so they introduced online multiple choice quizes (as many attempts as you needed, worth 20% of the over all mark), cut the number of topics covered and let people do the exam over a weekend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:22
|
|
|
Lid posted:This is a whole lot of moral relativism brushed up as being on the higher ground. If you want to yell about it being Chinese policy then yell about it also being Chinese policy, but the goalposts here were "it's Australian universities fault" so move those goalposts if you wish and discuss the cultural policy of Chinese education but don't act like your reponse is anything but not liking an answer and so the answer must have something inherently wrong with it. The goalposts were "but to only look at Australian universities and say the issue is there with university fees starts to try to pin an issue solely on a locally sourced educations system that could be "resolved" through a policy change at Government level that we should fight for." Which yeah, by policy decision of removing full fee places is resolved. The rest was about you being blinkered.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:I've had a couple of take-home exams. That's just asking for people to pay to have it done for them. It was in an entry level business law subject that the university decided the fail rate was too high so they introduced online multiple choice quizes (as many attempts as you needed, worth 20% of the over all mark), cut the number of topics covered and let people do the exam over a weekend. How insanely lazy and rich do you have to be to pay someone to do a take home, multiple choice quiz which you can do multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:I've had a couple of take-home exams. That's just asking for people to pay to have it done for them. It was in an entry level business law subject that the university decided the fail rate was too high so they introduced online multiple choice quizes (as many attempts as you needed, worth 20% of the over all mark), cut the number of topics covered and let people do the exam over a weekend. I think that kind of thing is pretty common in first year subjects. First year bio at my uni dropped the weighting of the exam to 35% and made it exclusively multiple choice to make it even easier. I did a first year philosophy subject as an elective and all you had to do in the exam was write an essay about one topic (there was one topic covered per week). You could literally not learn 11 weeks worth of material and still get a HD for the exam.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
hooman posted:The goalposts were "but to only look at Australian universities and say the issue is there with university fees starts to try to pin an issue solely on a locally sourced educations system that could be "resolved" through a policy change at Government level that we should fight for." How does removing full fee places resolve cheating? There are two side by side arguments here - one is full fee and international students, the other is cheating students/poor English speaking. Side tangent is group assignments, but my point was this issue is multi-faceted and not as simply as "stop full fee paying students".
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
The point is that if universities have no incentive to look the other way if international students are found cheating, they can come down on them like the sack of bricks they are allowed and in fact obligated to do so. Problem solved. No this does not solve the issue of East Asian education systems tolerating cheating and thus fostering an acceptance of cheating amongst students brought up in said systems but this is if you care to note the Auspol thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:40
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:How insanely lazy and rich do you have to be to pay someone to do a take home, multiple choice quiz which you can do multiple times. Vladimir Poutine posted:I think that kind of thing is pretty common in first year subjects. First year bio at my uni dropped the weighting of the exam to 35% and made it exclusively multiple choice to make it even easier. I did a first year philosophy subject as an elective and all you had to do in the exam was write an essay about one topic (there was one topic covered per week). You could literally not learn 11 weeks worth of material and still get a HD for the exam. But what is the point? Aren't the assessments and exams supposed to test whether or not the student has achieved the subjects stated learning objectives? I know the real reason they're doing it is so more people go on and pay a second year's worth of fees, but I'd love to hear them try and defend it. It'd be nice if they invested more into teaching rather than simply lowering the bar each time the subject doesn't met it's pass rate quota.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:The point is that if universities have no incentive to look the other way if international students are found cheating, they can come down on them like the sack of bricks they are allowed and in fact obligated to do so. Problem solved. No this does not solve the issue of East Asian education systems tolerating cheating and thus fostering an acceptance of cheating amongst students brought up in said systems but this is if you care to note the Auspol thread. It is the AusPol thread but I was responding in my first post to people who started to make a move that there was no cultural or country connection to cheating, and that it was racism to suggest otherwise and only "lazy shits" who perpetrated it. We can move back to AusPol but the debate moved beyond these borders when people started making things up going beyond mere apologism to full blown fiction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:I think just about every exam we had in the masters program was open book. Memory be damned, if you can't remember the model, look it up. The book won't help beyond that. You run into problems in some science subjects where there are a really finite number of problems that can be answered in the time an exam takes, so letting people bring notes / textbooks in is tantamount to just letting them bring in all the answers. E: Alternatively, they can end up ball-breakingly hard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
Lid posted:It is the AusPol thread but I was responding in my first post to people who started to make a move that there was no cultural or country connection to cheating, and that it was racism to suggest otherwise and only "lazy shits" who perpetrated it. We can move back to AusPol but the debate moved beyond these borders when people started making things up going beyond mere apologism to full blown fiction. You posted:We can explore this repeatedly, with for example the paid essay scandals, but to only look at Australian universities and say the issue is there with university fees starts to try to pin an issue solely on a locally sourced educations system that could be "resolved" through a policy change at Government level that we should fight for. It sounds a lot nicer and better but it's also as reductionist as people stating that all international students can't do the work. There isn't one "reason" for this trump answer, and in truth both sides have valid points. You're the one who was defending the university system as is and argued that removing full fee places for students wouldn't fix it. If that's not what you intended fine, but that is the point you made.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:You run into problems in some science subjects where there are a really finite number of problems that can be answered in the time an exam takes, so letting people bring notes / textbooks in is tantamount to just letting them bring in all the answers. Every university exam I took in Science and Engineering was open book. The point was to be familiar enough with how to do something that you knew where to look in the book and understood it well enough to complete the problem in the time required, because it meant you were sufficiently familiar with the material. I could solve any problem in the exam with no knowledge of the material with the textbook, but it would take far longer than the exam allowed. Admittedly this benefits those with good filing systems (sticky notes on textbooks with sections are great) and who are able to work quickly but that's far better than testing memorisation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:56
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:You run into problems in some science subjects where there are a really finite number of problems that can be answered in the time an exam takes, so letting people bring notes / textbooks in is tantamount to just letting them bring in all the answers. Not ball breakingly hard, but written in such a way that the material brought into the exam can only realistically be used as a reference and not a cheat sheet, unless the student somehow magically prepped for that specific exam question
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 09:59
|
|
|
Lid posted:Some people here are being very careful about what they are saying, but it is a fiction to state that the students alone do it as they're "lazy shits" as there is evidence that cheating is endemic in Chinese schooling for multiple cultural reasons (such as high demand, and belief in money for reward). We can explore this repeatedly, with for example the paid essay scandals, but to only look at Australian universities and say the issue is there with university fees starts to try to pin an issue solely on a locally sourced educations system that could be "resolved" through a policy change at Government level that we should fight for. It sounds a lot nicer and better but it's also as reductionist as people stating that all international students can't do the work. There isn't one "reason" for this trump answer, and in truth both sides have valid points. China's education system is poo poo because their teacher:student ratios are insane. Of course cheating is going to flourish under those conditions. That doesn't mean it's considered acceptable, though. Your own article shows that the higher ups in the administration at least pay lip service to the idea that students shouldn't be cheating. Cheating, or at least attempting to, is common in most education systems. The difference is that Australian universities generally catch and punish it. I've worked in high schools where anglo students have handed me assignments which are 100% plagiarised, and I've had Chinese students write and rewrite things from scratch to ensure it's their best work. If you want to attribute anything to culture, it's that students who spend sufficient time in the Chinese education system are used to being able to cheat and get away with it, not that they think it's acceptable. There's also the ridiculously high stakes on some of their exams, which will only ever serve to make cheating look like a good idea. Smegmatron fucked around with this message at 10:13 on Oct 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
hooman posted:You're the one who was defending the university system as is and argued that removing full fee places for students wouldn't fix it. If that's not what you intended fine, but that is the point you made. You misunderstood me - I said removing full fee paying wouldn't fix the issue of cheating. I didn't say therefore we should allow full fee playing and the current status quo. The situation with full fee paying is bad and it should be stopped, as the current university system is losing education as it has instead become a profit seeking venture, but my issue was that people conflating that if you stop full fee paying in Australia it will stop cheating and that cheating by Chinese international students arguments was racism. There are great arguments to remove full fee paying, such as I said that universities have instead become cash cows for the chancellors and the casualisation of the staff, but it was another jump to say that removing full fee playing will resolve the situation regarding cheating that we have been discussing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:12
|
|
|
Perhaps if the Australian education system weren't so loving mercenary and stacked towards summative assessments people wouldn't need to cheat but oh wait that would require eliminating a great deal of the systemic inequalities that serve to ensure that those without the means to achieve, don't Full fee paying students at Newcastle Uni were given pass marks in the early 2000s precisely because they were full fee paying irrespective of actual results. The university found it financially convenient because if those students failed their visas would be cancelled and the uni wouldn't receive their money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Here is a metaphor with two statements to explain my view of the current situation using Egypt as example: 1. Egypt has a cultural issue with misogyny and acceptance of female violence with 99.3% of women in Egypt being sexually harrassed (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/engy-abdelkader/99-percent-of-egyptian-women-girls-have-been-sexually-harassed_b_3373366.html?ir=Australia) 2. All men from Egypt are misogynists. The second is racist, the first is empirically accurate. To quote Smegatron "The [people] who do that do it because they're lazy shits, not because they're from a particular country or cultural background" It is entirely possible to look at this situation regarding Chinese students and not be Andrew Bolt frothing at the mouth labeling all Chinese some great menace ruining white people. It is also unfair to those who put forward the first proposition as being dismissed out of hand as racist or that their actions do not reflect a cultural background in society.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:20
|
|
|
you're taking an essentialist stance without looking at any of the intersectional aspects so don't be surprised when people call you out
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:24
|
|
|
Lid posted:You misunderstood me - I said removing full fee paying wouldn't fix the issue of cheating. I didn't say therefore we should allow full fee playing and the current status quo. The situation with full fee paying is bad and it should be stopped, as the current university system is losing education as it has instead become a profit seeking venture, but my issue was that people conflating that if you stop full fee paying in Australia it will stop cheating and that cheating by Chinese international students arguments was racism. I know exactly what you said. You are wrong in that removing full fee paying would fix the issue of cheating because it would remove the reason for the Universities to not penalise it. There is a financial incentive for universities to allow cheating due to full fee paying students. If you remove the financial incentive to allow cheaters (remove full fee paying students) the universities will no longer have any reason to allow it as passing cheaters/poo poo grads damages their international reputation. I wasn't saying that people saying that Chinese students cheat was racism. People here were saying cheating was a function of being an international student, rather than a function of being a lovely/overworked/underpoliced/lazy student. I worked 40 hour weeks at a dirt poor job and cheated a fuckload just to get through my degree because I didn't have the goddamn time to both make enough money for rent and food and to learn the course. Saying it's only the international students cheating is being racist. There are international students who won't cheat, and there are international students who will, just like there are Australians that won't and Australians that will if you think that cheating is a function of where you are from you're being racist. I don't know how to make that clearer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:26
|
|
|
Goodpart posted:you're taking an essentialist stance without looking at any of the intersectional aspects so don't be surprised when people call you out I'd like you to expand on this point, regarding intersectionality, as if you illustrate it I can be shown to be wrong or be able to address the situation accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 02:31 |
|
|
hooman posted:I know exactly what you said. You are wrong in that removing full fee paying would fix the issue of cheating because it would remove the reason for the Universities to not penalise it. Thank you, this is a very good reply and makes a lot more sense to me than your first reply. Unless I missed a Negligent post though I don't think anyone has been taking the view that only international students cheat, the closest has been arguments that disproportionately international students have found to have been cheating against a "control" of the domestic student population (I have no sources on this and I am NOT advocating this as an argument, DO NOT misquote me and say I expressed this view).
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 10:30
|
|