<< MonographCosmo

---

What is a fair method for an exam?

Please make comments or modify this proposal up to wt xx.xx.2003. If nobody has any more criticisms of the proposal by then, then we will have a decision. (See Wikipedia:Consensus_decision-making)

Proposal

Each student has the option of having zal or having an examination according to method option A or option B.

• In option A - web supported, it is quite likely that each student can get a grade of 5.0, since it's easy to justify this.
• In option B - oral, the grades would be be much more subjective, since an oral exam is subjective and leaves no trace.

option A - web-supported

Each student creates a page like this: AlbertEinstein and writes 5 goals (aims) on his/her page. The goals must be related to the fundamental reason why we have this course: WikipediaPl:Kształt_Wszechświata. Essentially any goal which will help the student and other students learn about this should be valid.

Examples:

• write a subroutine/function/program for one of the main cosmological formulae, in C or Fortran or octave
• check that an existing function from http://cosmo.torun.pl/~boud/DE/ is correct and package it in a format that is acceptable to standard http://www.linux.org distributions (e.g. with the GPL licence)
• together, several students could write several pieces of one software library to make many different calculations, for example for testing the OswiadczeniePrasoweDodekahedron hypothesis against WMAP data
• learn to use and modify some other package of cosmological software
• on the http://pl.wikipedia.org write/translate a page on a cosmological subject, including the formula and include a link to the GPL function or library - start from WikipediaPl:Kosmologia_obserwacyjna to see most cosmology topics

The principle is self-assessment. So each student writes a comment like "done" when the goal is achieved. If 5 goals are done, then that's a grade of 5.

We will retain some dictatorship. The lecturer (ZWiki:BoudRoukema) has the right to make constructive criticism of the goals, and, theoretically, may veto a goal, but must do this publicly, i.e. on the student's page.

The lecturer also should write 5 goals. The students have the right to make constructive criticism of the goals, and, theoretically, may veto a goal, but must do this publicly, i.e. on the student's page.

It might (in fact almost certainly! will) happen that some goals are too difficult, some are too easy, so you might want to change them.

Final date for changing goals: dd.mm.2003

option B - oral

Oral exam. Lecturer (ZWiki:BoudRoukema) asks questions and judges from the answers how much the student seems to understand.

przyk³ady

Przyk³ad tym stylu egzamin/stopien: zobacz ZWiki:MathMethods