= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Romashka comments on Open thread, Sep. 28 - Oct. 4, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (198)
More importantly, how do you persuade these people that they should spend their (presumably, valuable) time grading mostly stupid answers?
How would that be different from grading things under the current system?
Maybe exams should be layered - first, a test on basic terminology understanding, then a lottery of commenting on scientific research (1 ticket = 1 article).
Under the current system, grading is (relatively) easy because all you need to check is whether the answer given matches the correct one.
The proposed system would involve answers that cannot be mechanically pattern-matched and would need a LOT more time and effort to grade.