Mid-term Sampler

"Daniel-San" (Rot13) wrote in message
t...

"Opus" wrote...
[snip test questions]

First off, I ain't gotta clue as to which way to go with these questions,
though I do like Frank's channelling of Rodney Dangerfield from "Back to
School." Probably the practical answer.

Anyway, what struck me more is the specificity of the questions. While
certainly there are multiple "right" answers (so long as they are well
argued) it seems that there is a general tack one must take to get the
questions correct. Am I wrong on that?

No, I assume the professors are looking to see if we can apply previous
learning to currrent teachings, as well as, form coherent and logical
responses to their test questions. I will futher assume that the grading of
these test will be of both a objective and subjective nature, as we must
include certain information gleaned from our class-time and readings, and
they can tear us new assholes if we cannot write well enough to suit them
personally.

In my field the exams (PhD qualification exams) are much more open-ended.
A hypothetical might be:
_____
"Historian Herbert G. Gutman has argued that as the American working class
formed in the period of time commonly known as the "Progressive Era,"
these people relied upon a shared, pre-industrial culture to guide and
support them through the changes and travails of industrialization.
Discuss this idea critically, acknowledging supporters, detractors and
implications."
_____

There are no right answers here. The purpose (other than of course a
professionalizing "rite-of-passage") is to prove that you can regurgitate
the arguments of many different historians in a short time frame (these
exams are typically 90 minutes with a pencil in a small room -- makes it
easier to stab yourself in the neck if you don't have an answer.) The
faculty then break out the Rosetta Stone to decipher your chickenscratch
and then decide if you know enough about the field to "qualify" to move on
to write your diss. It's a strange process.

Sounds as though the grading at the PhD level is entirely subjective :~^ (

Maybe I'll find out for myself one
day........................................Maybe Not?

Op

Anyway, thanks for posting the questions. Very interesting. And good
luck...

Dan

"Opus" wrote ...
[...]

Sounds as though the grading at the PhD level is entirely subjective :~^ (


Yup. It's the ultimate apprenticeship -- the craft decides whom will be
admitted, and it is entirely subjective. There are many stories of people
writing dissertations that were approved by all but one member of the diss
committee. Stories abound about internal politics and reputations staked on
the refusal to sign a dissertation. There have been suicides and murders.
Whacked out ****.

Dan

"Daniel-San" wrote in message
. ..

"Opus" wrote ...
[...]

Sounds as though the grading at the PhD level is entirely subjective :~^
(


Yup. It's the ultimate apprenticeship -- the craft decides whom will be
admitted, and it is entirely subjective. There are many stories of people
writing dissertations that were approved by all but one member of the diss
committee. Stories abound about internal politics and reputations staked
on the refusal to sign a dissertation. There have been suicides and
murders. Whacked out ****.

Dan

Is there no second chance?

op

"Opus" wrote...

[...]

Is there no second chance?

Well.... for exams, sort of. Typically, a PhD in history requires four
exams. One in your "major" field, and three in minors. In most unis, the
major field exam can be repeated once. The minor field exams are a bit
trickier. Some people try to skate by without the cramming for the minor
exams, 'cuz they're not as "deep" into the literature. Because of this, some
unis are hesitant to give a second chance on minor exams. Sort of a "force
you to study the first time" thing, I guess.

As to the diss., I honestly don't know. I suppose you could change or modify
something to gain acceptance, or perhaps start over, but most folks have
poured the better part of five (or more) years into researching and writing
their diss. I'd imagine that it would be pretty tough to take if it were not
accepted. I don't know how someone would bounce back mentally to write
another.

Dan

Daniel-San wrote:

... There are many stories of people
writing dissertations that were approved by all but one member of the diss
committee. Stories abound about internal politics and reputations staked on
the refusal to sign a dissertation. There have been suicides and murders.
Whacked out ****.

I did undergrad research in a bug lab (fruit flies - behavior genetics)
and that exact thing happened. One member of the dissertation committee
wouldn't sign off on a PhD dissertation. The grad student went into the
prof's office, put a handgun on the table and asked the prof if perhaps
he didn't want to reconsider. The PhD was granted.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote


[...]

.. The grad student went into the
prof's office, put a handgun on the table and asked the prof if perhaps
he didn't want to reconsider.

To paraphrase Chris Rock: "I ain't sayin' it's right, but I understand."

Dan