The conversation

mrguyoramaHNSource author
Lessons learnedExperience excerpt · English

The one class where we built larger apps more akin to actual jobs, that could have been done …

… The one class where we built larger apps more akin to actual jobs, that could have been done entirely in the lab with locked down computers if need be, but the professor really didn't care if you wanted to fake the lab work, you still needed to pass the book learning for "Programming Patterns" which people really struggled with and you still needed to be able to give a "Demo" and presentation, and you still needed to demonstrate that you understood how to read some requests from a "Customer" and turn it into features and requirements and UX Nobody cares about people sabotaging their own education except in programming because no matter how much MBAs insist that all workers are replaceable, they cannot figure out a way to actually evaluate the competency of a programmer without knowing programming. If an engineer doesn't actually understand how to evaluate static stresses on a structure, they are going to have a hard time keeping a job. …

Original discussionFighting Fire with Fire: Scalable Oral Exams279 source comments · at import
3

What was this responding to?

Parent context · original excerpt

WO
WowfunhappyHN

I basically agree with the thrust of what you're saying, but also: > I wrote assembly and C++ code by hand, and it was expected to compile. No, I never got a chance to try to compile it myself before submitting it for grading. Do you, like, really think this is the best way to assess someone's ability? Can't we find a place between the two extremes? Personally, I'd go with a school-provided computer with a development environment and access to documentation. No LLMs, except maybe (but probably not) for very high-level courses.

Full original

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 3

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

WO
WowfunhappyHN

Maybe the middle space doesn't involve a compiler, but I really support allowing computers on tests for a different reason: the computer makes it possible to write out of order. You can go back and add to the beginning without erasing and rewriting everything. This applies to prose as much as code. A computer completely changes the experience of writing, for the better. Yes, obviously people made do with analog writing for hundreds of years, yadda yadda, I still think it's a stupid restriction.

Full original
SO
SoftTalkerHN

In my CS curriculum we learned SQL in theory only. We learned the relational model, normalization, joins, predicates, aggregation, etc. all without ever touching an actual database. In the exams we wrote queries in a paper "blue book" which was graded by teaching assistants.

Full original
JE
jenadineHN

I had philosophy class and we'd lose points for spelling mistakes in our essays. (Handwritten, no computer allowed)

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.