Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
This petition is about the Design of Bridges exam that took place on 3rd May 2019. The points below outline the general issues that may be mutual between the students that have taken the exam.
- Tutorials were not provided for some of the exam questions (Bearing Reactions (Q1) & Suspension Bridge (Q2)). Where Q1(a)(b) within the exam was based on the individual knowledge and background of the student which was not covered within the course material.
- Some of the questions within the exam were not correctly explained which makes it difficult to answer the question. (or not explained in lecture as the course material did not touch on several topics).
- The level of difficulty was far greater than expected of those who had done previous past papers and the tutorials. Even the students that would have thorough understanding of the course content may have faced difficulty.
- Distribution of the questions and the time that is given to answer these questions were not enough to complete and reflect back on.
Feel free to add comments to outline any points that you have personally struggled with and that have been missed.
More like this
CIBT Exam - Relief seeking
PY349 summer exam June 2014 unfair questioning and marking allocations
Updates
May 8, 2019
The department is still refusing to acknowledge the blatant gaps between the course material and this disaster of an exam. We are gathering the evidence to show that they set us up to fail by testing us on topics they never bothered to teach. Do not let them sweep this gross negligence under the rug.
May 8, 2019
The department clearly thought they could walk over us with this unfair exam but they underestimated exactly how many people they screwed over. We have built real momentum now and the administrators at this university can no longer pretend this disaster did not happen.
17 Comments
An unfair assessment of what was taught during lectures and portrayed to be important through tutorials. Marking was also unfairly distributed, questions which carried significant weighting in a question in all previous papers now accounted for less than half.
TWO of the COMPULSORY questions had structural forms that weren't covered by any numerical example to some extent in either the notes, tutorials or past examination papers. The bridge exams are already VERY difficult to finish in time even if the student knows everything by heart, this is partly because of the many small diagrams required in every question in order to produce a clear answer. So, if any additional 'thinking' is introduced in the exam, there's too little time to write even a B. And yes, Ana needs to "distinguish the people that deserve 100 from the people that deserve 70" but I doubt many people even managed a 70 in this exam. If so, well done to them!
With all respect to our lecturer, I have to comment that the course was not sufficiently orginised to be completey prepared for this exam. I see no point making it that critical and put students under risk of failing the module and wasting their time on resitting in the next year. There are people who have to travel thousands of miles to do it again, only just because somebody decided to make this paper “unstandard”. This is an exam and not the statistical experiment. Thank you.
Impossible to complete such the paper within 2 hours for me.
Quiet little time for us. Too many new types questions.
The limited time in the exam does not allow to address the first two questions which are never given neither on past exam paper nor tutorials.
So hard beyond expectation. I feel so sad.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
This petition is about the Design of Bridges exam that took place on 3rd May 2019. The points below outline the general issues that may be mutual between the students that have taken the exam.
- Tutorials were not provided for some of the exam questions (Bearing Reactions (Q1) & Suspension Bridge (Q2)). Where Q1(a)(b) within the exam was based on the individual knowledge and background of the student which was not covered within the course material.
- Some of the questions within the exam were not correctly explained which makes it difficult to answer the question. (or not explained in lecture as the course material did not touch on several topics).
- The level of difficulty was far greater than expected of those who had done previous past papers and the tutorials. Even the students that would have thorough understanding of the course content may have faced difficulty.
- Distribution of the questions and the time that is given to answer these questions were not enough to complete and reflect back on.
Feel free to add comments to outline any points that you have personally struggled with and that have been missed.
Updates
May 8, 2019
The department is still refusing to acknowledge the blatant gaps between the course material and this disaster of an exam. We are gathering the evidence to show that they set us up to fail by testing us on topics they never bothered to teach. Do not let them sweep this gross negligence under the rug.
May 8, 2019
The department clearly thought they could walk over us with this unfair exam but they underestimated exactly how many people they screwed over. We have built real momentum now and the administrators at this university can no longer pretend this disaster did not happen.
17 Comments
I feel that exam done nothing to test our ability to understand the provided resources or to show our comprehension for the course material. As much as I understand being tested to see how we can provide our engineering solution, in a 2hour exam with 4 questions I don’t think that was possible. It doesn’t make sense to have 9 tutorials which were very well detailed, to give a whole questions on a topic that only had two slides of theory (2nd question). I hope this can be taken into consideration and the grade boundaries can be changed.
An unfair assessment of what was taught during lectures and portrayed to be important through tutorials. Marking was also unfairly distributed, questions which carried significant weighting in a question in all previous papers now accounted for less than half.
TWO of the COMPULSORY questions had structural forms that weren't covered by any numerical example to some extent in either the notes, tutorials or past examination papers. The bridge exams are already VERY difficult to finish in time even if the student knows everything by heart, this is partly because of the many small diagrams required in every question in order to produce a clear answer. So, if any additional 'thinking' is introduced in the exam, there's too little time to write even a B. And yes, Ana needs to "distinguish the people that deserve 100 from the people that deserve 70" but I doubt many people even managed a 70 in this exam. If so, well done to them!
With all respect to our lecturer, I have to comment that the course was not sufficiently orginised to be completey prepared for this exam. I see no point making it that critical and put students under risk of failing the module and wasting their time on resitting in the next year. There are people who have to travel thousands of miles to do it again, only just because somebody decided to make this paper “unstandard”. This is an exam and not the statistical experiment. Thank you.
Impossible to complete such the paper within 2 hours for me.
Quiet little time for us. Too many new types questions.
The limited time in the exam does not allow to address the first two questions which are never given neither on past exam paper nor tutorials.
So hard beyond expectation. I feel so sad.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
I feel that exam done nothing to test our ability to understand the provided resources or to show our comprehension for the course material. As much as I understand being tested to see how we can provide our engineering solution, in a 2hour exam with 4 questions I don’t think that was possible. It doesn’t make sense to have 9 tutorials which were very well detailed, to give a whole questions on a topic that only had two slides of theory (2nd question). I hope this can be taken into consideration and the grade boundaries can be changed.