OP said Statics which is could be the engineering course studying static systems. In my class, every test question required a numerical answer with no matching.
Only time I ever saw grades like this in engineering classes were when the whole test cascaded. Essentially one question broken into like 8 parts (or maybe 3 questions in 5 parts) but essentially A. was define your system boundaries and maybe variables and B-X were then solve for x to then find y to find z etc etc. had a class where essentially no partial credit was given and if you got A wrong you could still go about the entire rest of the test with the wrong parameters and not know it so even if your logic and math was correct for B onward, because A was wrong B was wrong C was wrong, etc. the mean on one of the midterms was 16 once (high was 95, median was 0). Class was fucked and a couple years later those professors were quietly moved off of that class.
That’s often how they work. I think that’s what the other person was explaining, albeit in a convoluted way, but in essence, each subsequent question builds off the answer from the previous question. So once you get a wrong answer, you get all the next answers wrong too. If you get the first one wrong, you’re fucked.
And you’re not just graded on the answer, but whether you’ve applied and followed the formulas correctly.
On the bright side, they’re usually graded on a curve.
On the bright side, they’re usually graded on a curve.
I remember back in undergrad I was in a control systems course for ME's and the max score on the midterm was like a 30, and the teacher curved on the max so that was an A+
It kinda depends on how stuff is wrong and so on. But if there are cascading errors, then getting stuff wrong will intrinsically lead to the kind of score shown (and a failing grade).
Depends on how early on the mistake it (because mistakes do cascade) and if they can evaluate "was your process right, but you're mistake at the start fumbled the final result?"
Like, if everything is right, but someone brain farted and wrong a 6 instead of an 8 despite thinking in their head that they wrote 8. then a le
If both can be proven, the a fair professor will mark you wrong for the final answer, but not the the whole problem (say given you 20points for a 30point question (in order words, "this mistake costs you a letter grade)). With the lesson/assumption being, you would have caught that mistake on a pre-submission review/non-time crunch scenario.
Civil engineering grad here, my statics professor sure as hell did not let us use the textbook or other resources for exams loll. It's the basis for the rest of civil engineering, you really need to understand it. We did get a formula sheet though, it was either an index card size cheat sheet we put together or he gave us the formulas on the test. Can't remember.
For our final we were given something we had never done before. The professor said. "It's one thing to be able to memorize formulas. It's another to be able to apply those formulas to something new."
This was before the age of ai and we had to design a skyscraper with his location and specifications in mind.
Meaning we had to account for EVERYTHING. Ground type, wind speed weather and even budget.
I mean these are students not PE certified engineers. While I appreciate the gravity of the impact as an AeroE myself working human spaceflight, if you don't let people fail while learning how will they improve. I had a gnarly orbital mechanics class that the first exam average was a 45/100 or a FEM class junior year with a 65/100 midterm avg. Guess what happened? A majority of the students didn't want to go into structures because they didn't think they could havk it only because the TA was an AH with an axe to grind.
There's a balance between rigor and outright demoralizing teaching.
Had an electromagnetism test like this except the professor outlined in the instructions that you could, at any point, check your answer for any question with him to make sure you are entering into the next one with the correct number. But if you chose to do this, you would sacrifice all possible points you may or may not have been given for that specific question. It was straight psychological warfare.
Yea my statics exams were like 4 questions each with 5-6 numbers your looking for, such as solving for force on different truss segments or applying a load in a different direction or position. So if you were confused on the setup entirely or made a small mistake you may get a quarter of the test wrong
Mine too. We did have one especially nasty one where every answer was in the original numbers given & tons of people mind gamed themselves out of acing it in 5 minutes though
I had one elec engineering prof who decided he wanted to try a new marking schema for that term: -1 for a wrong answer, 0 for blank and 1 for correct. The first midterm had an average of -4/20 (negative four). I felt amazing for getting a 9/20.
After that midterm he decided he was going to go back to the usual system of marking.
Scenarios like this always really fucked with some professors weird hell curve grading schemes where suddenly your like 4 st dev above average with a score of 9/100 on a test worth 30% of your grade and you could theoretically skip the.rest of the class and still pass
In my undergrad there was very little scaling and all courses required you to pass the final to pass the course. That particular class was never scaled.
I had questions like that on my robotics exam, 4 questions with 2 questions with multiple parts (a-d for each) that were based on the previous question.
So if you didn’t set a good frame up for Q1, then the parts and Q2 could be wrong if not impossible to solve, and impossible was also a correct answer on some hw so it could make sense. Luckily my professor gave partial credit if your work was legible.
Only time I ever saw grades like this in engineering classes were when the whole test cascaded. Essentially one question broken into like 8 parts (or maybe 3 questions in 5 parts) but essentially A. was define your system boundaries and maybe variables and B-X were then solve for x to then find y to find z etc etc.
When I was in school, the advice we got for questions like this was literally to just make up an answer if you couldn't find it, for the purposes of answering the following questions, and you could still get full marks if your process and answers were correct from the inputs you picked even if they were different from what would be expected from using the actual correct answers as inputs.
My fluid mechanics prof had a fairly simple solution to prevent this. The questions would typically be in steps and start with "Verify such and such is 100 kPa" and you had to calculate / derive that answer. If you somehow could not, you wouldn't get any points for step 1, but you could move on to step 2 knowing step 1 was 100 kPa and use that in step 2 and not be completely slaughtered b/c you forgot how to do a single step in a lengthy process (or b/c you couldn't remember some bullshit like an obscure trig identity you hadn't seen or used in years)
I remember Statics. First test, 3 of us had passing grades, and everyone else was 0-50%. Out of 80-100 people. Statics and Dynamics made so many people switch majors.
I had the same experience with my P Chem 1 and 2 classes (Statistical Mechanics and Quantum Chemistry, respectively). Statistical Mechanics was more reasonable, but was graded on a curve. The high grade started in the 90s, and by the final unit exam, was in the high 60s. Quantum Chemistry was wild though. Our professor told us at the beginning of the class that the only people who say they fully understand quantum mechanics are idiots on the Internet and grifters on TV. The highest grade on any exam in that class was a 70 on the dot, and I knew someone who had an average of a 26 in that class that got a C.
Yeah, I switched from Chem to ChemE to Mech/AeroE to MechE in my first two years. My counselor said “normally I’d try to talk someone out of this, but I’m just going to sign off on it”.
I didn’t want to humblebrag in my last post, but on that Statics test, I got 100, another guy (I assume, 10:1 M/F ratio there) got 90%, and the next was 70-80%. A,B,C. The prof said he wasn’t going to grade on the curve because there was a 100% so at least someone fully understood the material. When he said that, I flipped my test upside down and grumbled like everyone else. My soon to be GF was next to me and got 25. She switched to business after that class.
We had two Chem degrees at my undergrad, one was ACS certified, and the other wasn’t. The only differences were whether or not you had to take Calc III and whether you took the intensive, year long set of Physical chemistry classes, or a one semester overview. I kicked ass in P Chem because I heard it was the hardest subject within chemistry, so I studied all summer and came in with a leg up. I then made the mistake of enrolling in the graduate Quantum Chem class my senior year, and between grad school applications, getting drunk, and fighting with my situationship, I ended up dropping it halfway through the semester. Great times
if this is a college course and the answers have to be typed in, i could see this probably being a few questions with multiple answers to submit for various parts of each question. an early error, big or small, would then affect the following answers, even if the logic and application are correct for the following answers.
Yeah this looks like a grading platform for test scans. At my university, you’d answer 2-4 long-form questions for most exams, the teaching/proctoring staff would then scan the physical test you wrote, and TAs would grade it on a platform online and release grades digitally like this. It is my understanding that most large engineering schools do it this way in the US, at least.
How do you get a grade so low tho? I've never studied for something and then scored basically 0. Only way I've seen that happen is by having the entire exam depend on one specific value you got wrong + no points whatsoever for getting any part right - and if that's the case, fuck the teacher.
A typical statics test is a (BIG) singular multi-stage problem.
Each stage uses your answer from the last stage and if you could not complete the last stage it provides a designated wrong answer for the previous stage to use on this one.
Each stage would be worth 5-20 points based on how many steps it was expected to take and the correct answer for that stage was only worth 1-2 points. Most of the value was correctly identifying variables, setting up, and then doing the work.
All this is to say that it would be impossible for OP to score this poorly if they knew LITERALLY ANYTHING about the material.
Even then, I’ve known a lot of professors to at least give partial credit if your methods are correct or you show your calculations. Can’t fathom how someone gets a 2 for their total grade.
699
u/greenmachine11235 1d ago
OP said Statics which is could be the engineering course studying static systems. In my class, every test question required a numerical answer with no matching.