Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
Hey guys,
This petition is meant for students who feel that the short answer questions for PSYC 328 were written vaguely, rather open-ended and even inadequately in that they did not properly express what the professor and TA's expected from the students.
The class average was extremely high for the MC section of the exam, and overall most students displayed a certain level of mastery over the material, and yet, somehow almost 300 people are believed to have answered the short answer portion of the exam poorly and were blamed for not grasping the material and told to do some soul-searching, rather than owning up that the questions were poorly worded and graded unfairly.
Please sign this petition and be sure to include your student number, as well as your issue with the short answer section of the midterm whether it be on the grading or the issue of just how the question is worded. I.e on the question about the From Janet with Love, students were asked to describe coping methods that were displayed from the class material, and yet were then told that we did not receive grades for describing and that we were expected to explain them. This was clearly not what the question asked for, and as such we should not be punished for answering the question as it was asked.
Overall, it is more likely that there is an issue with the questions if almost the entire class had issues answering them to the teacher's satisfaction rather than with the class itself.
Thanks!
More like this
The unreasonable Forensic Psychlogy Exam JSB174
Math 2720 Petition
12 Comments
260691906 We were blamed for a faulty grading scheme. Accusing 300 of us for not grasping the material when there is almost a 30% variation in two sections of an exam testing the same material is unprofessional and unrealistic. The proposed “accommodation” is not enough to make up for this.
I went to the midterm review session to look over my short answers. For the 1st question their only critique was that I didn't provide examples for acute vs. chronic illnesses however this was by no means indicated in the question and is actually not related to the main purpose of the question. For the 2nd question the TA could not answer why I got marks off but said... She suggested adding more examples however she said what I wrote was great... I took up the whole space to write this response that was apparently one of the best in the class so I do not understand, with the space provided, how I could have given more material. I appreciate their moves to help change their mistakes for the final but this does not change the fact that the midterm grades will have a large effect on our final grade and that they cannot accept and understand that their grading is the problem versus us.
260729555
260745480 I am deeply disappointed with how this issue was dealt with. The questions were vaguely formulated, which did not allow students to show their understanding of the material.
It is clear that 300 students were blamed for a mistake on the professor/TAs' parts regarding either the wording of the question or the mark scheme. There is simply no way that all students this year happen to be less intelligent than all the students last year, which is what was implied.
The way this midterm was handled is unfair. The SA questions were very poorly phrased and were graded by being very biased because our MC average was high. And the fact that this isn't the first time students in her class go through this should very clearly addressed. The TA who came to class said that we should have been more specific when answering the questions, but the wording of the questions did not mention that. I don't believe the students are the ones to blame for a faulty or badly worded exam. For a TA to say "learn all the slides by heart next time" and not give a decent excuse for the way my exam was graded is very unprofessional. I think the way this situation was handled by the professor and the TAs were very unprofessional.
The short answer questions were rather open ended questions, however the rubric for the short answer questions were very specific. With such a short amount of space, students were expected to give alot of information, and were penalized if they were not able to do so. We were also penalized if our answers were not identical to what was expected of us. For example, I answered the SA question about Janet with Love. I listed how Janet used emotional coping and how she used it - but I did not give the definition of emotional coping. I was only given part marks because I didn't give the definition, even though my answer clearly illustrated I knew what emotional coping was (and the fact that never in the question did it say I needed to provide clear definitions). The professor and the TA say that the SA was meant to demonstrate our understanding while the MC was meant to demonstrate memorization. I do not think the grading of the SA is representative of this. I think the SA questions were poorly worded and the rubric was way too specific for the questions asked. Student ID 260670329
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
Hey guys,
This petition is meant for students who feel that the short answer questions for PSYC 328 were written vaguely, rather open-ended and even inadequately in that they did not properly express what the professor and TA's expected from the students.
The class average was extremely high for the MC section of the exam, and overall most students displayed a certain level of mastery over the material, and yet, somehow almost 300 people are believed to have answered the short answer portion of the exam poorly and were blamed for not grasping the material and told to do some soul-searching, rather than owning up that the questions were poorly worded and graded unfairly.
Please sign this petition and be sure to include your student number, as well as your issue with the short answer section of the midterm whether it be on the grading or the issue of just how the question is worded. I.e on the question about the From Janet with Love, students were asked to describe coping methods that were displayed from the class material, and yet were then told that we did not receive grades for describing and that we were expected to explain them. This was clearly not what the question asked for, and as such we should not be punished for answering the question as it was asked.
Overall, it is more likely that there is an issue with the questions if almost the entire class had issues answering them to the teacher's satisfaction rather than with the class itself.
Thanks!
12 Comments
260652694 The grading was very unfair. The professor wanted way more detail than the space available to answer. The grade average was also significantly lower than the multiple choice. I believe despite students making the effort to demonstrate what they had learned in class, they were penalized to bring the overall test average down rather than due to individual performances.
260691906 We were blamed for a faulty grading scheme. Accusing 300 of us for not grasping the material when there is almost a 30% variation in two sections of an exam testing the same material is unprofessional and unrealistic. The proposed “accommodation” is not enough to make up for this.
I went to the midterm review session to look over my short answers. For the 1st question their only critique was that I didn't provide examples for acute vs. chronic illnesses however this was by no means indicated in the question and is actually not related to the main purpose of the question. For the 2nd question the TA could not answer why I got marks off but said... She suggested adding more examples however she said what I wrote was great... I took up the whole space to write this response that was apparently one of the best in the class so I do not understand, with the space provided, how I could have given more material. I appreciate their moves to help change their mistakes for the final but this does not change the fact that the midterm grades will have a large effect on our final grade and that they cannot accept and understand that their grading is the problem versus us.
260729555
260745480 I am deeply disappointed with how this issue was dealt with. The questions were vaguely formulated, which did not allow students to show their understanding of the material.
It is clear that 300 students were blamed for a mistake on the professor/TAs' parts regarding either the wording of the question or the mark scheme. There is simply no way that all students this year happen to be less intelligent than all the students last year, which is what was implied.
The way this midterm was handled is unfair. The SA questions were very poorly phrased and were graded by being very biased because our MC average was high. And the fact that this isn't the first time students in her class go through this should very clearly addressed. The TA who came to class said that we should have been more specific when answering the questions, but the wording of the questions did not mention that. I don't believe the students are the ones to blame for a faulty or badly worded exam. For a TA to say "learn all the slides by heart next time" and not give a decent excuse for the way my exam was graded is very unprofessional. I think the way this situation was handled by the professor and the TAs were very unprofessional.
The short answer questions were rather open ended questions, however the rubric for the short answer questions were very specific. With such a short amount of space, students were expected to give alot of information, and were penalized if they were not able to do so. We were also penalized if our answers were not identical to what was expected of us. For example, I answered the SA question about Janet with Love. I listed how Janet used emotional coping and how she used it - but I did not give the definition of emotional coping. I was only given part marks because I didn't give the definition, even though my answer clearly illustrated I knew what emotional coping was (and the fact that never in the question did it say I needed to provide clear definitions). The professor and the TA say that the SA was meant to demonstrate our understanding while the MC was meant to demonstrate memorization. I do not think the grading of the SA is representative of this. I think the SA questions were poorly worded and the rubric was way too specific for the questions asked. Student ID 260670329
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.
260652694 The grading was very unfair. The professor wanted way more detail than the space available to answer. The grade average was also significantly lower than the multiple choice. I believe despite students making the effort to demonstrate what they had learned in class, they were penalized to bring the overall test average down rather than due to individual performances.