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

From the draft article:

>There was an attempt to administer the test to another 30 or so students on a foundation (pre- degree) programming course at Middlesex University. That administration failed, because the students – rightly, in our opinion – were incensed at the conduct of their teaching and the ar- rangements for their study, and simply refused to do anything that wasn’t directly beneficial to themselves.

Uh... what? What is the "conduct of their teaching and arrangements for their study"?

That random bit of information is followed later by this:

>3.3 Third administration

Because of what we found on the first and second administrations, there was no third administration.

That doesn't follow at all. The first quote states the students refused to take the test, while the second states a final test would have been valueless. I very much doubt that it wouldn't have had value, as it could strengthen or weaken their claims, so I'm forced to conclude the students refused to take an exam? Something doesn't seem right in this classroom.

Ultimately though, without any information about how things were taught, I'm not sure this study tells us much. With a lot of studies across a variety of teaching styles we might be able to extrapolate something, but a single one just throws doubt on the methods of teaching which is a massive un-controlled and un-known variable to the whole system.



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

Search: