Tumblr strikes again

>watching too much Suits

Kek, not possible

Always, what they high schoolers don't realize is that the test would be about 5x harder if they were allowed to use the book. They're just being lazy fucks, they don't actually believe that stuff.

I'm sorry the quadratic formula is too hard for some people.

>Do you honestly think you'd know as much about science or maths now if you were just allowed to use the book on tests constantly?

same argument as calculators:

if I'm able to have the book (or a PDF, or whatever) with me at all times, I can concentrate on learning useful material which will earn me a job, not something that could be done by a machine or secretary instead

if everyone gets an A on an open-book test, that means the test is flawed

as scientists we can either
- continue doing the same work over and over again for no benefit
or
- build on previous work and documentation, creating/solving something new

you are not going to invent or even emulate modern science, engineering, medicine, or law from "scratch", so stop wasting time and learn applications of existing resources instead

They allow you to bring a couple of papers with equation/formulas/whatever you want anyway. Thats not the point.
If you're doing any serous course having all the best textbooks with you wont help you if you didnt study hard enough.

...

The hardest exams I ever took were completely open book. We could even use the internet.

>Where is your incentive to go actually make something stick if you're just allowed use the book constantly? Furthermore, why revise over the information when you can just use the book when the time comes?
>Do you honestly think you'd know as much about science or maths now if you were just allowed to use the book on tests constantly?
>What good is a doctor if they don't know anything? Anyone can open a textbook and look at what the ailment is.
your argument is flawed.

Being allowed to have documentation doesn't mean you won't review it, and certainly doesn't mean you won't retain pertinent information.
If anything, it would allow us to go further by not focusing on stuff we don't have to spend as much time learning by heart.
Everything you use most often will be remembered anyway.

You know what, let me give you an example right here, but answer my question first: what is your area of expertise?

>you are not going to invent or even emulate modern science, engineering, medicine, or law from "scratch"
>so stop wasting time and learn applications of existing resources instead

user, that's not the point. The point is not to reinvent the wheel, as it were, it is to actually *learn* the information that modern science, engineering, medicine and law have all obtained, respectively.

No one is saying that we should learn it from scratch. I'm saying we should actually have to learn it, and not just look it up constantly when we don't know. Revising, visualising, drawing diagrams, and memorising are the best ways to do that. Then you won't have to consult that stuff all the time, you can just know it.

You can never be sure with Tumblr, user.

kek, I love when OP tries to make a "look at this stupid bitch, amirite guys" thread but everyone ends up piling on OP for being the real stupid bitch.

I'm in college. First year of Nursing.

As a middle school and high school teacher, I can say that there is some truth to that philosophy. It is just that a lot of things we learn in public school nowadays are things that are better off memorized. This is so that they can be easily accessed when needed (example: simple calculations at the store).

In defense of the asinine tumblr post: there is not enough time given to teach students proper collaboration. This includes when to collaborate and how to collaborate with others.

Also, it is not surprising that people in the adult world would revert back to school-test-mode when given a worksheet. The person who handed that out is an idiot. There is a time and a place for a goddamned worksheet.

I am an EE student, and i only use a calculator if i have to for time constraints. I like to fully understand what is happening, not just plug it in and hit a button. The guy i sit next to always uses a calculator, and cant answer shit without it. To be fair though, no employer is going to pay me to figure shit out on paper, and the guy next to me does kniw a lot more about graphing calculators than i do.

This
I have had some courses that were hard as fuck, even with open book. If you dont know what is going on, even google wont help. And dont get me started on the courses you cant even google.

If having access to a book can successfully simulate "learning" a subject, then what the is the point in learning it?

OP, I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong on this.

I agree for the simpler subjects, but you really have to understand why an equation works in order to use it effectively.

>why is that the correct answer
>the book said so

>why is that the correct answer
>here, let me explain it based on my intricate knowledge on the subject.

Right, so having access to a book will not take the place of understanding. So you may as well have the book.

But it's not learning, user! It's just looking at a question, looking at the answer in the book, and then regurgitating it back onto the test directly in front of you.

It's not like reading notes, visualising the problem or concept, knowing it, and *then* putting it on the test on the day.

Are you OP or are you sarcastically making fun of OP?

No, I am OP.
You still haven't answered the question.

>It's just looking at a question, looking at the answer in the book,

I would say that if it's possible to just "look up the answer in the book" then that is not a worthwhile subject.

The point of tests is not to see how much you can memorize but how good you work under stress.

Also in most Uni exams you DO get to bring note sheets where you can write down anything you want.

>If they need books to help me, let them use books.
you do realize that's what they're doing in the time between the nurse taking down your vitals and reported symptoms and actually coming in to see you, right? and if you have any diagnostic tests performed, they hit the books before coming back in to see you

And if "looking up the answer" can simulate what you can do, then you haven't really learned anything either.

I'd say for all practical purposes and intents that either is equally effective. Rote memorization is possible from either side. Even the minutia of mathematics could be learned using open book tests. The real question has to be which possesses more efficacy. Efficacy would be determined by the time it takes to effectively grasp the subject. Certain tests and subjects would be easier to learn from open book tests, like history or geography. The mechanics of mathematics would probably take longer where the actual equations would be effectively learned with open book tests. Additionally by opening the books you offer the teacher more time to actually teach and find which particular subjects are genuinely difficult.

How do you come up with new ideas, when you can't really hold the current ones in your head? What good does your spatial reasoning capacity do, if you can't populate it, without consulting a book first?

>How do you come up with new ideas, when you can't really hold the current ones in your head?

I have plenty in my head. I understand the subject. If I didn't, I would fail my (open book) exams, as in fact many do. I don't know every single fact I might need, because that is a)impossible, b)a waste of time, when books exist.

>using aids in the job and the real world is the same as using aids in a school setting where the focus is on you learning the stuff
Nice strawman there, buddy.

>Nice strawman there, buddy.

back at ya, kid

>Where is your incentive to go actually make something stick if you're just allowed use the book constantly?
It sticks anyway. When you keep doing the same thing over and over again eventually you can do it from memory. Ironically this is a better way to learn because Exams work on the system of memorizing some shit you learned a few months ago to remember once. Once you do the exam you forget it.

But if you rely on the book you wont develop the understanding.

Except he pointed out an actual strawman argument, and you apparently don't know what it means

> Where is your incentive to go actually make something stick if you're just allowed use the book constantly?

Your incentive comes from learning more about your craft and/or getting payed user.

> Do you honestly think you'd know as much about science or maths now if you were just allowed to use the book on tests constantly?

Yes, because the only reason we retain such knowledge for so long is because we put so much stock in books in the first place. Our main medium to store scientific and mathematical knowledge came not from some test you take for 45 mins but from a book that took centuries to fill up.

The typical test you take on paper are just cheap alternatives to the much more preferred but expensive live demonstrations. This is the cost of making education compulsory to the public, you have to cut corners on proving someone's understanding of materials especially when you have a set amount of students for at BEST two hours a day (which most programs on the college or k-12 level don't have). Don't confuse these paper tests you take as the sentinels of final understanding. They exist because not everyone has the time of day for you to properly demonstrate your ability in a given subject.

> What good is a doctor if they don't know anything? Anyone can open a textbook and look at what the ailment is.

The purpose of a doctor is to provide the educated second opinion on those ailments. They are people who went through the ringer to prove to the public and medical community that "yes, I can be trusted with another human's well being and life". They are not meant to be some living encyclopedia, they are meant to be the person who can properly investigate your condition using materials and tools that you know jack shit about to prove if you have an ailment and suggest or provide necessary treatment.

ITT people who do not appreciate the hard work necessary to truly understand complex subjects and the luxuries that they enjoy which were created by people that do

>Collaboration is bad
>Fact checking is bad
>you should know everything always!!! Learning is for chumps!
You're right, all engineers should be able to design a 7th generation fighter jet backwards and forwards all on their own without the aid of AutoCAD or textbooks...

>being so ignorant to the possibility of open book tests being designed around being open book
>possessing this little common sense
have fun raging about an inherently false premise, you stupid faggot

Nice strawman. I didn't say those things were bad. You have plenty of time to do all that stuff before the test. The test is there to prove if you actually know the material or not.

>he

samefag, YOUR strawman was that school and the workplace are the same thing

>But if you rely on the book you wont develop the understanding.

So why did I get 95% on my last open book exam when the class average was 55%? What is the difference between me and the average, if, according to you, it isn't understanding? For that matter, how is it possible that everyone didn't get 100%, since, according to you, we can just "look up the answers in the book?"

Not him, but considering the ratio of male to female users on this site, I think it's safe to assume the user is male.

> knowing the material
> memorizing equations and not how to use them.
Honestly it depends on the subject.

I don't usually go to the hospital (is this an american thing?)

I sit 1 on 1 with the doctor.

BTFO
T
F
O

That doesn't prove anything. That doesn't relate to actually knowing the material. Maybe you just studied harder than the average, and the book didn't save them.
What subject was it? That'll help paint a clearer picture.

Then with access to all the internet and all books you want, you should be able to design a plane's electronics, shouldn't you? Let's say in 3 days.
If not, what would prevent you from doing so?

OP here. Same here. I think everyone sits one-on-one with the doctor.

I've never once seen her open a book to get a clue on what's wrong with any of her patients.

You should be able to think on your feet, rely on memory, and work independently.
When we can rely on complete automation, then maybe that won't be important to develop skills for. Then we can just test for creative problem-solving / conceptual understanding.
Until then, it's useful to test for that sort of thing.
I agree that sometimes, preventing use of outside sources / cooperation can just serve as a confunding variable.
But it doesn't have to be a binary choice; an appropriate share of tests can be open book while others are closed book, same with allowing group cooperation.

How about the fact that 3 days isn't nearly long enough, even with the book, I still wouldn't be able to do it in 3 days. Sure, I would have all the information on hand there, but if I don't actually know what the fuck I'm reading, I'll fail to design it.

>but if I don't actually know what the fuck I'm reading
how long do you need to read it all? I mean the answer is in the books somewhere, right?

people who use wolfram alpha/open books rarely understand what they are doing and the second the problem gets more complicated than the examples they are given or require critical thinking they get fucked
real life is not a bunch of one-part non-word problems

Yeah, but user, three days to read the book and build the plane's electronics, along with lunch breaks and sleep? I'd need a fucking while longer than three days. But I'm sure if I read the book long enough to get it, I could do it, despite having no clue about electronics.

>That doesn't prove anything. That doesn't relate to actually knowing the material.

So what does it relate to?

>Maybe you just studied harder than the average, and the book didn't save them.

How could it not save them, if they could just look up the answers?

>What subject was it? That'll help paint a clearer picture.

semiconductor physics

>people who read books rarely understand things

OP everybody

>"lol fuck society amirite?"
>t. aesthetically juxtaposed username
>/tumblr etc etc/
Why do you let this upset you OP? Retards are retards. Refer to

You know the material because you studied it, presumably. You didn't just look it up on the day and end up with 95%, user.

Because maybe they didn't get it.

...

That's not me.

You strawmanned his argument anyway.

Congratulations, you've just invented the very slow calculator.
Also, if you think you're "fully understanding what's happening" by working out fractions in your head, you're either not doing EE, or you're not referring to using a calculator: you're referring to using wolfram alpha and MATLAB.

>You didn't just look it up on the day and end up with 95%, user.
>Because maybe they didn't get it.

Yes exactly you idiot. So I understood it and they didn't.

Maybe they're just stupid then. How do you get an average of 55% when the information is right there?

>arithmetic is not valuable

You're retarded kiddo.

I only go to do that for like 2 out of 40 classes. Definitely never for a math test. Could be anecdotal but I'm guess most math departments are run similarly

I just finished a TAKE HOME final which we had a week to work on and it and the midterm that came before it were hands down the hardest test ive ever taken (Bacterial Physiology) I think the best kind of test is one that is designed that you actually have to grasp the material, forcing someone to memorize equations or other minutiae does not equate to learning or intelligence.

It's meant to make you care about the material and prepare beforehand. You might have resources at your job, but you also have prior knowledge and experience; that's why they hired you in the first place.

ok.

And after you did that, would you need to reread everything to do it again? No, because you would have understood it enough to do it the first time.

That's not what a strawman argument is.
What he said isn't even really a false comparison, it's just a matter of determining where the comparison falls short, and addressing it.

You're right the paralegals do that

Can't speak for real doctors, but as part of ski patrol. We have a textbook laying around to double check AFTER the patient leaves. It's considered poor taste to actually check the book in front of a patient on how to tie them to the traction splint

Lazy teachers fucking hate open book tests because you have to actually write a good test. If somebody can pass your test just by quoting equations/facts from a textbook, why the fuck have the test? Are you testing their ability to simulate the function of a textbook?

But he's right. As long as it's no a problem/answer book. Law students do it too I think.

Design the questions so the answer isn't just parroting facts. It's much more useful.

Let's have a holocaust of all tumblrfags, who's with me

A lot of tumblr isnt that bad, its just that the only parts you regularly see are the retarded ones

so they can claim a territory of their own, guilt white people out of their money and destroy everything around them? Has history taught you nothing?

we'll learn from their mistakes and do it better

dubs say OP is one of them commenting.

For oddly specific stuff? Sure, but you need to actually understand what you're doing before you can expect to get paid to do it.

Any idiot can follow a step-by-step guide. IDK how to do a lot of higher level maths, but I can follow a book example and easily get the right answer on a similar problem. If following directions without a basic understanding of the subject was all it took then why would higher education even be required?

In most serious classes I've took a book wouldn't help at all, if a book solves your problems for you then what's the point?

The only classes which that would help in is first year where you they ask you about known proofs.

When I think about it, hardest exams I've had were openbook. Exams that can be solved completely by reaching for a book are a sign of a lazy professor, classes that are generally book memorization that can't be applies in any other way are useless

>defending rote memorization
biologist detected

Your thinking of a doctor

are they allowed to post here?
I mean biologists are already stretching it

Comprehension needs to be tested.
Open book also teaches direct dogmatic thinking rather than comprehension.

Oh yeah? How do you explain context and application questions in Biology then? Or questions that aren't found in the textbook.

Yeah, but even if there are questions there that the book doesn't have an answer for, the book is still going to be a large help for a lot of them. For example: definitions, scientific calculations, graphs, an explanation of a concept, etc. If it isn't, then you're either doing Mathematics or the book is useless.

look i know you want to justify your terrible life choices, but theres no need to lie like that

>replying seriously to memers
I am disappointed, user.

What do you think the content of most open-book exams are like? The questions certainly aren't "what is this?" and the answer is on page 20. Good open-book use the book as a resource, not an answer sheet.

>Use CAD programs for years.
>Learn math for spiritual purposes.
>Never use math in my hobby work - the programs do it all for me.
>Get job designing piping.
>They have a special program, and demand I do all my work in that program.
>It's not even a full CAD program - it's basically a glorified version of Pipe Dreams.
>Stop mentioning things like tensile strength to my boss because he visibly get's angry when I do.

Math has real value, but not in the day-to-day world. We don't have time to wait for you to do the problems yourself on paper, or even with a calculator - we want a back-of-the-envelope answer in five minutes.

I even question the purpose of testing a person's ability to apply a concept - in the real world, your boss already knows which concept he wants you to apply and how he wants you to apply it. Creativity generally gets you in trouble in this sense.

>I sure am glad that my doctor has to consult her textbook everytime I visit; aren't you, guys?

She has stacks of notes from her days as a student, shelves of professional literature, and many diagnosis programs she's legally required to use before she's allowed to prescribe any treatment.

When a pathologist tests someone for cancer, they can't use their own knowledge - they have to compare what they're looking at to standardized results. Often, this is nothing other than asking a computer to isolate and compare a variety of molecules from the patient - legally, the doctor has to do what the computer says. Even if all her education tells her a diagnosis is wrong, she can't contradict it.

You live in Wonderland - Carrol actually wrote the book to mock professionals in general, and mathmaticians and academics in particular. The zero was invented by Vedic fundamentalists, and math never becomes more practically significant than Zeno's paradox.

Also, I dropped out of kindergarten - so going to school doesn't matter either.

I'm not studying Biology, retard. But I do like the subject.

What's wrong with having knowledge and expertise directly downloaded into your brain? Don't give me the "it won't be useful in real life" crap.

Your first part somehow assumes that your pipe software magically appeared.

The truth is that your job does not use much mathematics, but a lot of jobs do. If you want one example, the job of the people who make the software you are using.

However, you are still using mathematics even though you are aided by a computer. I mean, do you think the fun part of doing math is to do the computation? Fuck no, it is all about the reasoning to get to a desired answer. A computer cannot reason for you, but it can aid with the computations.

Even if all you do is plug the numbers in the program, you are still thinking math, though your job is probably trivial.

>Also, I dropped out of kindergarten - so going to school doesn't matter either.
Fuck what kind of shitty parents did you have.

wasn't going to jump in, but this. my GF is an math education TA and all of her tests are open book. when she tells her students they get all giddy like"yay free A!", the the test comes and they all get shit grades.

the book is a resource, not a fucking answer sheet.