<p>I’d like to correct my earlier statement that “they” give points for stapling a lab report correctly to say that I know that one of my colleagues in engineering did in fact give points for stapling a report correctly. It’s possible that everything is submitted electronically now, and I don’t have direct evidence that there is more than one prof who did it.</p>
<p>But 0 points for an alternative mathematical expression of the same thing? I doubt that you can find a physicist anywhere who would do that.</p>
<p>Also, in problems dealing with the statistical mechanics of spin systems, expressions in terms of the hyperbolic trig functions are generally preferred to expressions written out in terms of the exponentials. The reason for this is that one is likely to be differentiating expressions like tanh x. For people who occasionally make sign errors (e.g., me), it’s easier to get the correct answer with the hyperbolic trig functions.</p>
<p>RacinReaver, I personally wouldn’t take points off if a student left his name off of an assignment. However, if more than one student in a class did that, and the quality of the problem sets was quite different (and the class is large), then it would be a bit tricky to know which was whose, especially early in the semester. In grad classes, I know the individual students’ handwriting after the first problem set. Sets out of order–well, it’s just a courtesy to the grader not to take up the grader’s time hunting around for the problems. </p>
<p>I have a lot of friends (even relatives) who are engineers. I respect them. In the OP’s particular case, I think the question is whether the prof’s actions are typical for the department or not. Perhaps he is either a new hire, or someone close to retirement, and the rest of the department is not like that. On the other hand, maybe everyone in the department thinks the OP would deserve 0 points for his answer–there seem to be some people on this thread who are arguing that. In that case, seriously, I think that the OP should contemplate transferring, either to engineering at a different college (now knowing the kinds of questions to ask when he is picking a school) or to physics, math, maybe computer science, at the school where he is.</p>
<p>@ boneh3ad: Sorry, I don’t think I usually appear to be an egomaniac, even on behalf of physicists everywhere.</p>
<p>On the other hand, when I called the professor’s action “foolish,” I meant it. A lot of the posters on this thread have advocated that eurekameh needs to just get over it, and give the professor the answers in the form he wants in the future. I respect the practicality of that advice. It’s probably what eurekameh needs to do, if he wants to be an engineer at that particular school. Nevertheless, I think that physicists in general would not truckle in that way, but would just drop the course and possibly the major. Any physicists out there who would disagree? </p>
<p>In the early Cretaceous era, when I was on my first sabbatical, one of the grad students in the research group I was visiting was very upset with his score on an engineering exam he had taken, out of the science department where we were. This was back in the hand-held calculator era. It was a common practice in several science departments that if you solved a problem to the point that you had an expression where numbers could just be substituted (no further integration or differentiation required), then you could just substitute the numbers and the units, and that was full credit. (Gasps of horror from the engineers.) Needless to say, that was not full credit in engineering. I don’t think it was 0 credit, but it was only about half credit. The student pointed out to the professor that the problem had been solved correctly. The professor said that he didn’t know, it might have been.</p>
<p>Going back to an even earlier era, when I was an undergrad, I was introduced to the idea of setting up the final answer with numerical substitution and correct units, and calling it done. The prof for the course (now a member of the National Academy of Sciences) said he took the point of view that “any fool with a calculator” could generate the answer from that set-up. I should add that this was so long ago, I didn’t even own a calculator at the time.</p>
<p>Hi, aibarr! Excellent response to the OP. OP, does aibarr’s answer make sense to you? It sure does to me.</p>
<p>When I was a new engineer, back in the dark ages before people had laptops at work, I was sketching up a detail. Structural engineers typically use scales in increments of 16 (such as 1/16" = 1’-0", 1/4" = 1’-0", etc.). For some reason, the graph paper the company used was drawn in FIFTHS of an inch. So to save time (I thought), I drew my sketch at 0.2" = 1’-0". </p>
<p>Oh, my goodness, my boss YELLED at me for doing that! “What are you doing?? That’s not an engineering scale! Why would you do that? Don’t let it happen again!!!” He was so angry. I just didn’t get it, because a draftsman (they were all guys) would have taken my sketch and redrawn it to the right scale, anyway. So yes, I thought he was ridiculous, but I never made that mistake again! And I certainly didn’t protest to him about how unfair he was being.</p>
<p>Just to show that it does happen all of the time, I just found a graded assignment from algebra where I got an answer wrong because it was in the wrong form.</p>
<p>The acceptable answer was (-8±√88)/4 and I put -2±2/4(√22) which is equivalent and not that far off. Still wrong. I didn’t care that much, because I still had an A, but it just goes to show. After reading some answers here, I now believe it’s because they don’t have time to double check it and it doesn’t look like the right answer at first glance. I would have brought it up to the professor if I didn’t still have a good grade.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be so incensed about the algebraic example, because I think there is a common understanding that expressions are supposed to be simplified so that radicals are in the numerator, whenever possible. So part credit for that answer seems ok to me.</p>
<p>I don’t think that there is a common understanding that exponentials are superior to hyperbolic trig functions, or vice versa.</p>
<p>This sounds like an argument I’ve heard from one of my kids. How were problems done in class? While there might not have been explicit instruction to put the answer into a particular form, it might have been understood from examples provided in class. It also might have been stated, but not in written form.</p>
<p>I recall teachers who had specific requirements for homework and tests, as do my kids now. One has a Calculus teacher who insists work must be show, or no credit is given - even if the answer is correct. The point is to show now only that you know the answer, but that you know how to get there in the manner she wishes you to use. Yes, there night be 3 or 4 valid ways of getting there, but she wants you to demonstrate a particular way. There may be a time in your future when the way you do it won’t work, for some reason or another, and she wants you to know how to use the proscribed method. Don’t show your work, don’t get credit.</p>
<p>Beyond that, I have known teachers who don’t give credit if you leave your name off papers (even if it is obvious whose paper it is). And I’ve known those who wanted papers stapled a certain way. They didn’t dock a significant amount, but it might be worth 5% (loss of 5%, not that you get 5% for writing your name or stapling a certain way). I have also known teachers who gave tests where the instructions at the top said to read through before starting, and the last instruction said to sign your name only and turn it in. And yes, they fail students for any marks on the paper other than the signature. It’s about learning to follow instructions, which to that teacher may be just as important as anything else they are teaching. If a student in a lab doesn’t follow instructions, it can be deadly!</p>
<p>To the OP, I would suggest talking with the instructor, and asking what you can do differently on the next exam. This one is done and graded. If he wants the problem done a certain way, and you do it another way, you have not completed the assignment. You just need to know if that is the case.</p>
<p>I agree partly with CTScoutmom, but not completely. </p>
<p>It is conceivable that there could be safety issues in engineering connected with formatting. In any field where you need to communicate frequently with people who do not have your technical training, you need to express the results in a form that is understandable to them. So, for example, if the end user has been taught about exponentials but not about hyperbolic trig functions, the expression in terms of exponentials would be preferable for that particular use, true enough.</p>
<p>On the other hand, this problem does not sound as though it included any statements about communicating with a technically untrained audience–presumably quite the reverse, if the professor was the only audience.</p>
<p>I don’t agree that if the professor wants the problem done in a certain way and you have done it another way, which is correct, “you have not completed the assignment.” The assignment is to solve the problem. The reasons why people are so insistent about “showing your work” tend to fall into several categories:
They don’t want just the final answer copied from someone else or from a solution manual. That shows nothing.
If the answer is wrong, they might like to see where you went off the rails, so they can adjust their teaching accordingly.
They might want to give you part credit for getting as far as you got. In Sandra Tsing Loh’s Caltech commencement address, she claims she got through Caltech on part credit.
In very rare cases, at high levels, they might want to understand what you are doing with an unconventional approach. I have heard that Galois threw chalk at his examiners, during an entrance exam for college in Paris, because they couldn’t understand what he was doing. [This may be apocryphal.]</p>
<p>In my field, very little is gained by solving a “new” problem using a technique that you have been taught explicitly. Different approaches are highly valued, because they may solve problems that don’t yield to the conventional approaches.</p>
<p>In any event, if a particular format is required for some reason, the exam or the course syllabus ought to state that explicitly. </p>
<p>My evil twin is thinking: Heh, heh, on this next exam, there will be 0 points for any answer expressed in terms of spherical Bessel functions. But I won’t tell anyone that. Bwahahah!</p>
<p>In post #45, did you have the square root of 22 in the numerator, or the denominator–maybe I have misread it the first time, thinking about it now. Also, why wouldn’t the expression be reduced to lowest terms?</p>
<p>The radical was in the numerator. I should have typed it differently so that you could see that is was two-fourths times the square root of 22. That’s my fault, but one could see that on paper very clearly. My answer was more simplified that the one wanted, because in the original, (-8±√88)/4, everything was over 4, whereas in my answer I simplified the (-8/4) and the (±√88)/4. Granted, I could have made it (1/2)<em>√22 instead of (2/4)</em>√22 but regardless, it was apparently wanted it’s raw form, which makes no sense to me. Lol. Maybe he was more focused on us knowing the process of solving the problem rather than simplification of the final answer.</p>
<p>I am quite chill, actually, in the way I’m approaching this. I went into his office hours with the intention of explaining my issue, showing no signs that I was annoyed, angry, cocky and arrogant, etc. I get that he was preparing me for the real world by taking off points on my exam, but giving me 0 points? - That’s a bit harsh, considering that I demonstrated more knowledge on inverse laplace transforms than my peers, since I took the inverse laplace transform of a more complicated function. Basically, he gave me a 0 for not realizing that I could have factored a simple polynomial.</p>
<p>I would still not have been satisfied with partial credit to my answer, let along a zero. I did the problem like it was asked. That’s all there is to it; if a professor or a boss wants me to do it a certain way, SAY IT. Otherwise, I will just take the exam in a literal way and find the inverse laplace transform, like you asked.</p>
<p>And your comment about people being jerks to people who are jerks to them? Well, that statement goes for him, not me. I was absolutely kind and understanding when I approached him with my issue. He then got irritated for a reason I can’t seem to comprehend, and said that I was harassing him. I mean, if you’re a professor, you should EXPECT to be harassed and not have any say about it. I applaud his bravery in making such a statement. So to clarify any misunderstanding, I’m not the first jerk here. An eye for an eye.</p>
<p>JonJon13926: Yeah, I had started thinking that your post didn’t make sense unless you had the square root of 22 in the numerator. And your formatting was actually fine.</p>
<p>I can’t explain your experience, other than to ask: presumably this was high school?
I think you’d expect better from a college prof.</p>
<p>If you got the same answer I agree you should have not recieved a zero. Technically you should have been given full credit. Hopefully this problem was not a major portion of your grade.</p>
<p>I’m assuming this is an engineering class. It’s possible the reason the instructor was so adamant is that in many cases the simplest representation in the frequency domain is more important than the time domain result of the inverse transform. A I’m sure you know, the transfer function will be used to do identify poles and zeros, and do Bode plots, phase and gain margin and root loci, etc. and to get it into the appropriate format to perform those tasks most simply is really a timesaver. Of course I realize that was not the task you were given.</p>
<p>Of course, he could have just pointed that out to you. In this case he may just be a jerk.
BTW - you are obviously pretty smart to even remember how to complete the square. I might have given you extra credit if I was a teacher.</p>
<p>When I’m grading I usually feel if you’re a grad student at one of the top schools in the country you should have figured out by now how to write your name on a piece of paper and staple things in order. ;)</p>
<p>(I usually don’t actually take points off for these things. It’s generally just for repeat offenders.)</p>
<p>If you have already spoken to your Prof, there is not much else you can do. I would drop it and make sure you have the answers in the format he is looking for next time. I once had a Prof state that if anyone had an issue with grading on a test question, he would re-grade the entire test. I did speak to him once about two test questions. He agreed with me and gave me some credit. Then he re-graded the rest of the test and took off the same number of points by nitpicking another answer. I ended up with the same grade. Point he was making, don’t question the Prof. You won’t come out ahead.</p>
<p>Seems quite brave to harass the person who has complete control of your grade. Years ago I had an actuarial math class and we had a similar incident. Prof decided to give impossibly hard questions on next tests to destroy everyone’s average so they would have to be happy when he upgraded your final mark to a B.</p>
<p>Harass? Although he claims I was doing this, I had a legitimate issue that needed to be solved. It wasn’t like I was constantly nudging him for no particular reason. I had an issue, I went to him for help, as simple as that. I’m sure he has plenty of students “harassing” him throughout the day, but that is his JOB: to provide students with the guidance they need. If I’m going to become a bad engineer by coming up with solutions that are too complex to be of practical interest, he’s the bad professor who can’t provide adequate guidance to his students.</p>
<p>The point of the test isn’t to write down correct answers, it’s to show that you learned the process he was trying to teach you. You did not do this, and you didn’t express it in the correct terms. I’m surprised anyone on here thinks you deserve any credit at all. </p>
<p>If you end up being a bad engineer, it won’t be because your’ solutions are too complex, it will be because your’ ego impedes your’ ability to work with others.</p>