First exam is completely different than any material we've covered in class

Because they are just that, retarded professors

usually they say to read the book and test over what was in the book, but most students only bought the book and then used at something to write class notes on

dont teachers have to meet course outlines? So imo if my teacher feels a concept needs to be emphasized more and can assess that my class will be able to pick up other concepts on our own, i see no problem with it. That is assuming my professor is competent.

It's done to weed out the CS students. Seriously. The next exam will be entirely material appropriate.

>It's not MY job to educate you
are you alright with that? attending a class and getting absolutely nothing out of it?

Bullshit. This happens in my calc classes all the time

Its to weed out any lazy bums, you have to do that in countries were education is free because otherwise your classes get to big.

if they didn't let you know that the material should have been studied, kinda dick move, however you should be motivated yourself to make sure you are as knowledgeable as you can on the subject if the information is relevant.

Then why hold lectures at all?

>education is free
>pay thousands of dollars
?

Are you retarded?

In most of European country college is free.

In 30 years that won't be the case outside of lab heavy courses.

To weed out the weak.

(((free))))

> everyone who is smarter and/or more successful than than me is a jew

That's right, jews outperform your inferior race in every field.

...

>taught by a chinese grad student that barely speaks english
Why the FUCK do they let this happen? I know for a fact that I was unperforming in college because of those unintelligible chink fucks and their soft, disaffected lecturing.

My brother went to Duke and said he never had such a problem. Does it really not happen in good schools?

>Why do retarded professors do this?

I know the answer to this.

Because they have taught the class so many times and they want each exam to be different from the past. Overtime the exams diverge from what they have taught because they do not want to "repeat" the same question (They know student look at old exams).

>having more than one exam in the course
God, I wish university was that easy in my country.

>Why the FUCK do they let this happen?
University pays Women's Studies professor 100K a year. WTF does a Woman's Study professor do??

In order to pay for this gold plated turd, they need to cut corners... Chinese Grad student gets paid barely above minimum wage.

>University pays Women's Studies professor 100K a year
Bullshit.

>half of the students manage to transfer the knowledge from the lecture to new exercises
where exactly is your problem?

>that kid that never shows up to lecture but makes a perfect score on the exam

FUCK YOU

that's not what he meant
>>/reddit/

As master Miyamoto Musashi would say: "The job of understanding is yours"

Imagine being this jewed by the """education""" system

What is it? 1920?

lmao I never attended a single lecture in my PDE class this semester and I aced it.

Fuck you and everyone like you.

It's not fair.

It is. If you actually knew what fucking weak convergence means you wouldn't get stomped on the oral exam like you were you stupid cunt and I fucking dare you to ask me one more time to help you over the phone during the exam, see what happens.

Read niggers, read.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_experiments

Fuck you. Do my work for me.

what do they care, you're not paying them anyway

>exam is tecnically within the course outline
>but it's actually plain fucking difficult and exercises are different from everything you're used to

Fuck professors that do this. It's not fair.

>takes an exam meant to test mastery
>expects an in-class homework assignment instead
aaaaaand this is proof that degrees are worthless, because brainlets like you get them

>aaaaaand this is proof that degrees are worthless
Do you not have a degree or something?

I do, and I was looking for a proof to my longstanding conjecture that they are worthless. I have found it here on Veeky Forums.

material covered in class is literally just the bare minimum introduction to the unit or chapter, at least for upper level classes
you have to read from the book and possibly do extra unassigned problems (perhaps ask the professor for some suggested problems) in order to pass some of these classes

What do you define mastery to be though. Exams typically test for whether or not you know the material being taught, not necessarily mastery of the material. What is the distinction and why is it important. I consider mastery of a subject to be phd tier, and undergrad to be entry level knowledge.

>lecture ppt slides have notes
>"the above material doesn't need to be memorized for the test.

Then why the FUCK is it even on the notes?

>ppt has an graphic with a fuck ton of information around it
>professor only talks about a few things on it

Then how about FUCKING EDITING THE IMAGE TO ONLY HAVE WHAT IS RELEVANT.

>mastery of an entire subject
>one exam on one section of material
clearly what I meant was that if a 2nd grader has mastered addition of three digit numbers they should be able to derive complicated theorems about euclidean domains

...

This! If I don't need to know something for the test, and thus get an A in the class, and thus have a high GPA, thus get my degree and be desirable to employers, I don't give a fuck!

Maybe you don't quite know how things are over in my uni, but over here the bare minimum to pass (60%) is what most people aim for in most exams. And knowing the bare minimum to pass doesn't amount to mastery at all.
Only maybe 5% of students get consistently good scores, but guess what? Even students who've always gotten average scores end up graduating just like anyone else. Are they brainlets for overcoming bullshit exam after bullshit exam?

D's may get degrees, but they don't get jobs (unless exceptional circumstances)

that, my friend, is where you are mistaken
a D scorer with good interpersonal communication is way more likely to get a job than an autistic A scorer with sweaty, hairy armpits

D's don't even get degrees usually.

But a D scorer is less likely to get their foot in the door unless exceptional circumstances. the A scorer and D scorer both competing for a job where you submit a resume with your GPA, the A scorer is more likely to get the job. The D scorer and A scorer competing for a job where the job requires at least a 3.0, the D scorer doens't even stand a chance.

fair point
but I agree with that they seem unlikely to get the degree in the first place
oh well, whatever

No such thing as a free lunch, your heavy taxes fund the genocide of your own peoples.

>your heavy taxes
Enlighten everyone here of their extremely heavy and apparently oppressive taxes

((education))

taxes don't even fund it, everyone is born into debt thanks to deficit spending out of "compassion"

the current model of the world is a slave state

60% is more like a C, but whatever. Standards here are a little different because grade inflation is nonexistent, in STEM at least. I don't know the extent to which employers are aware of these things, though.

>I don't know the extent to which employers are aware of these things, though.
they can tell everything within at most two months of hiring someone, believe me

My friend graduated with an electrical engineering degree with a 2.7 GPA. He lied about it when applying to jobs and was still hired. After working at a company for 2years he neglected to include his GPA on his resume, since it doesn't matter when you have experience

easy as fuck.

He's implying that the taxes are too high. This is a problem because he is extremely rich and successful, and thus will never have anything to gain by sharing with the poor people who don't deserve a reasonably high quality of life.

He's right. The only reason this is tolerated is that the university system has head a virtual monopoly on professional certification for centuries. It's an outdated institution that is currently in its death throes.

>is currently in its death throes
lol

yeah lmao its "THROWS" not throes you fucking moron jesus christ
the etymology is from like when you throw something, your arm spasms outward. this is what dead people do, also known as the death grips

stfu faggot

>i would like to learn x
>if i knew how to do x, i could get a job doing x and be comfy
>if i buy books about x and teach myself how to do x, i can't get a job doing x because reasons
>i must instead pay an old person to vaguely talk to me about x on top of buying books about x
>i must also pay for s, t, u, v, w, y and z even though i only really care about x and would like to get a job doing x. the s, t, u, v, w, y and z courses will also not be substantial enough in themselves to educate me towards s,t,u,v,w,y or z careers if x somehow doesn't pan out as i imagined.
>can only get the opportunity of getting a job doing x if i pay for, successfully complete, and waste my efforts in s,t,u,v,w,y and z as well, and if I don't then I wont get a piece of paper thats says i'm qualified at x.
>4 years later i have finally achieved my degree in x, so now i can get a job doing x because this piece of paper says i'm good at x even though, by ratio, i've spent more time collectively on needless s,t,u,v,w,y and z courses which have no benefit to x and i dont understand rigourously enough by themselves to make a career out of anything but x, which my piece of paper says i'm qualified for just x anyway.

>can't get job doing x cause non-white immigrants got accredited for the same positions requiring my similar education solely from having mumbled gibberish at mosques since birth and cooking kebabs for a summer.
>"pajeet only needs $10,000/yr for the position cause he's subsidized half a million dollars in benefits and handouts from the government, so why would we hire you user? $200,000/yr is too much!"

I know a white guy who got a job at Netflix a few years ago, and he’s making almost 300K with no more than a bachelor’s in CS. If you’re smart enough, people will want to hire you regardless of diversity quotas. The main problem with immigrants is that they can easily replace the working-class thickies who, for whatever reason, haven’t pursued higher education and have no plans for doing so - hence Trump’s popularity.

It´s no secret that their marginal tax rate is almost twice that of the marginal tax rate in most US states.

Comparing Texas with Finland, the difference is more than double, with Finland placing at ~50% of GDP and Texas at ~20% of GDP.

Certain items and goods, such as gasoline, are four times more expensive in Finland than they are in Texas and other states not ruled by democrats longing to grab cheap political points by levying heavy taxes on private transportation.

>The main problem with immigrants is that they can easily replace the working-class thickies who, for whatever reason, haven’t pursued higher education and have no plans for doing so
> who, for whatever reason, haven’t pursued higher education
Are you thick in the head, ignorant or simply a hardcore ideological leftie who warps reality to fit his views whenever the two conflict?

The normal distribution of intelligence in a given population is the reason why "working-class thickies" do not attain a degree - they simply lack the mental faculties required to pass an exam in - let alone understand - mathematics beyond a middle-school level.

Okay...? I never said that couldn't be the case. Yes, some people don't pursue education because they're just too damn stupid. Also I am a mild leftist, but I don't think I mentioned anything to make anyone assume that.

Do you think we enjoy lecturing? Do you think we care about your freshman shit? The good students rise to the top regardless.

So your response when you're called out for doing a shitty job is "Do you think I care?" Glad to see my hatred for professors isn't unjustified in the least.

I'm not a prof f4m, but I do lecture you little shits and I despise having to do so. It's not that I don't care about you, it's just that lecturing is such a fucking garbage way to teach shit that's already in the fucking text book anyways. I don't mind spending time on students, it's just that it wastes both my time and yours.

It's almost like you're denying that students have a better experience learning from professors who give a shit.

Translation:
>I didn't study so I didn't recognize problems and materiel on the test

...

Christ, your students must find your condescending ass insufferable. No wonder you're having a bad time.

No they actually like me because I spend time outside lectures actually teaching them shit. You're not a child, you shouldn't expect people to read books for you aloud, and if you do there's plenty of good video-lectures for you. I'm actually being genuine here, I'm not gonna waste time just because "that's how it's always been" and the students appreciate that.

Garfield is always the answer.

You two know books exist, right? Just check the fucking syllabus.

...

If a professor doesn't give a shit about the welfare of their students or what they're teaching, how in the fuck do you expect the students to care about the class? I'm not paying thousands of dollars and taking large chunks out of my day for a class where the professor couldn't give a rat's ass about making sure that I intuitively learn important concepts and skills. You can give a damn about your students without having to "baby" them. Professors with mindsets like yours create drones, not innovators or thinkers.