Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throw1234651234 1874 days ago
This is an irrational party(professor) trick that wastes everyone's time.

An argument could be made for "read the (short) instructions at the start". An argument cannot be made for this. There is often very little value to skimming the entire question set before the exam.

3 comments

It's been a very long time since I had to do any tests, but back in my school days, with multiple-choice tests, I evolved a method of quickly answering everything I was confident to know 100% throughout the entire test in a first pass, reserving the rest for subsequent increasingly slower passes.

What tended to occur was the earlier fast passes at the very least warmed up the cache upstairs, and some previously unclear questions became obvious. Then for the remaining questions, they often had dependencies with other questions and their answers, which I could use to deduce probably correct answers.

This was obscenely effective. To the extent that I would ace tests in classes I barely attended and never turned in homework for, in some cases culminating in teachers publicly accusing me of cheating on the exams. Though some of that was also due to switching from private to public school where I had already learned the material in the previous years.

I once used this method and spent the last ten minutes of a test just guess-and-checking the solutions to a question I didn't remember the formula for. Of course, it was the last one I checked. (I wasn't confident enough to early return).
I used the same method and can confirm it was very effective for me as well.

An added bonus is reduced stress about time limits. After the first pass you have a big chunk (if not most) of the test done in little time - this feels good and also leaves you with a clearer idea of how much work and time is left.

I don't know about you, but for my tests on a curve where I might not be able to answer all the questions, doing the quick skim to answer the low hanging fruit before getting to the harder problems is a good way to make sure you don't run out of time and lose out.
I did the same, but if I'm doing that skimming and I know the answer to question 12 is (c), I fill in (c) and keep going. I don't read all the questions, then go back and try and remember which of the questions I knew the answers to off-hand. Instead, I'd do the test in 3 passes.

1. Answer all questions that I know the answer instantly or (for math type tests) can solve within a few seconds. Skip anything not quick. 2. Go back and answer questions that I know I can solve. These usually take a minute or two (since the easy ones should already be done). If there happens to be a question I know I can solve but also know will take "too much time," skip it. 3. If there's time left, work through any remaining questions (hopefully there aren't that many), making a best effort to prioritize the ones I'm more confident that I can solve in the time remaining.

Also, content of later questions can be useful earlier, and getting some background brain cells working on the hard stuff while you churn through the easy stuff could be worthwhile.

It's a good lesson, but it's a lesson about taking tests not about the material. I can see arguments for and against including that in any given class.

>content of later questions can be useful earlier

In some tests I have seen future questions answer previous ones. For a contrived example:

"Q1: What color was the bookshelf? A. Red B. Green C. Blue"

"Q2: What sentimental item did John take from the red bookshelf?"

I was never sure if it was on purpose to reinforce reading all questions before answering or if it was merely poor test design. Usually it was more subtle than my contrived example but it did bump my scores on some tests up a bit.

Why would you not answer questions you know straight away? That wastes time.
I agree. More over, half of these have genuinly mutually exclusive instructions.

And from those mutually exclusive requirements you are supposed to pick the "least likely one" else you are wrong. It is good example how manipulation works however. You put people into unsolvable situation and then blame them.