<p>Have you ever taken a 3 hour exam and noticed a few people leaving a good 30 minutes before anyone else has even finished? Perhaps later you find out that one or two of these early finishers actually got high marks on their exams. Maybe you even discover that one of them got the highest overall marks in the class
So you are left thinking that this person must be freakishly smart,how they manage to do so well and do it fast??????????????</p>
<p>they know the material like the back of their hands.</p>
<p>Work quickly and don't make mistakes, simple as that.</p>
<p>They may really have a mind for the material. I do that with my music history stuff; we get 2 hours for normal exams (I think some are 3), and I finish anywhere from 30-60 minutes after the exam starts.</p>
<p>I do that all the time. I'm just a very fast test taker and I know that if there's a question I can't answer, I'm not gonna have an epiphany with it unless I get a hint from another question. Doesn't mean I'm acing all of the exams, I just don't see the point in sitting there for another 40 minutes pretending like I'm gonna suddenly know all the answers.</p>
<p>I never took more than 20 minutes on an exam, and I checked and double checked each one afterward. Most of my exams were meant to take 2-4 hours. I'm definitely not freakishly smart, I just have a knack for recalling information thoroughly and accurately very quickly. So when I read a question or essay prompt, IF I know the answer.. I know everything I need to know to answer it immediately without having to think about it. If I DON'T know the answer, I know that just as quickly and can move on without dwelling on it. I don't have any greater ability to master or retain the material than anybody else, I just know what I know and what I don't very rapidly.</p>
<p>I eventually started sitting around for a half hour after I finished exams because I was getting crap about it from professors... which I don't get.</p>
<p>I generally am one of those people that finishes within 20 minutes with high marks. I am good at recalling information and I read very quickly. I did the same thing with the ACT/SAT/AP tests haha.</p>
<p>The only test that took me more than 20/30 minutes was a History exam, and required two two-page essays, in addition to two short essays and five pages of multiple choice questions. </p>
<p>Tests don't really stump me, probably because I study for them and have a pretty good memory.</p>
<p>So princessmahina, what you're saying is that in your whole entire life, there was only ONE test that took you more than 30 minutes. No test has ever made you pass the 30 minute mark except the one disastrous History exam.</p>
<p>Wow, you genius. :)</p>
<p>Yeah, I always assume the people who finish that early are those who know they didn't study and accept their failed grade. I'm usually one of the last to turn a test in.</p>
<p>For regular multiple choice type tests, I usually blow through them in under 20 minutes. My 100 question biology final took me 20 minutes and I got a 97 on it.
Now, for chem and math where there are questions that really require some work put into them, I work right until time is up. I work through everything once, but, then I go back and rework my problems if I have time just to double check myself. </p>
<p>Any test that is definition type responses I find that my first instinct is my best. I read the question, bubble the answer I think is right and move on. I may make a small mark next to the couple that sound like trick questions and scan them once more when I'm done, but that takes moments. </p>
<p>I had a few walk out early for my chem final where there was no human way for them to have done the math problems or balanced any of the equations. That happens too, those who knew they just blew it and leave.</p>
<p>in physics, questions were easy. I could finish everything in 20 minutes and get in the 97th percentile. but then again, most of the people I was competing with in the class weren't cut out for it.</p>
<p>in quantum, I would spend the whole time crunching out numbers and get back a C. granted, the TA graded harshly and the class boiled down to self teaching from an incomprehensible textbook, it gives you an idea on how varied exams can be</p>
<p>and then again, there are geniuses. and they usually turn out to be someone you don't expect</p>
<p>PS - quantum mechanics is evil. they already proved nutrinos can move faster than light, so e=mc2 isn't so universal anymore. makes you think how much of quantum is going to turn out to be false.</p>
<p>Most of my exams are equation based, so anyone finishing quite early is an abnormality. The ones I have that are multiple choice on are usually quick for me, because theres not a whole lot you can re-check (except for my physics exams, which still for the most part required actually solving to get the correct answers as opposed to reasonable guessing).</p>
<p>Actually mrund3rd09, those neutrinos you are talking back turned out to in fact not be faster than light, and thus e=mc^2 still holds. The scientists didn't take into account the curvature of the earth into their calculations.</p>
<p>Remember</a> those faster-than-light neutrinos? Great, now forget 'em -- Engadget</p>
<p>I think it depends on the subject. My best subject has consistently been Spanish, and even in AP, I didn't have to study and I'd just whiz through the tests and quizzes and finish with a reasonable amount of time left. It comes naturally to me, and once I learn it for the first time, I don't have to study it again, although that will probably change when I take Advanced Spanish next semester.</p>
<p>For other subjects, it's a completely different story. I always finish English and History exams toward the end, because it takes a while for me to plan out my essay in my head and then write it the way I want to write it. I'm not a natural at math and I can't immediately link hard concepts together, so math and chemistry exams always take me down to the wire, unless it's really easy, or something.</p>
<p>It really depends. People will of course finish exams faster if they know the material or if the exam format is one that allows for fast completion, like memorization oriented MCQ exams. I breeze through my CS exams pretty quickly, but for, say, math, I'll take longer because I know I'm prone to making silly mistakes if I work too quickly, plus I like to check my work a few times. Each to their own. Just because someone finishes faster doesn't necessarily mean they are "smarter" then you are.</p>
<p>Idk why it matters so much to finish early, its not like you get a special trophy and unlock achievements. I always finish early on exams but I choose not to be a showoff and use the rest of my time going thoroughly through my question to make sure I'm 100% right.</p>
<p>^ I'm the same way. On most of my exams I finish answering all the questions in a fraction of the time available, but I usually stay around for a long time anyway for two reasons: First, because doing so won't reduce my score and might improve it, and second, because that way I am not advertising the fact that I found the exam easy, which makes it less likely that people will pester me for help/answers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually mrund3rd09, those neutrinos you are talking back turned out to in fact not be faster than light, and thus e=mc^2 still holds. The scientists didn't take into account the curvature of the earth into their calculations.</p>
<p>Remember those faster-than-light neutrinos? Great, now forget 'em -- Engadget
[/quote]
</p>
<p>thanks. I still hate quantum though</p>
<p>I've always taken longer than most to finish exams. I like to go back and recheck the work to make sure I didn't make any mistakes. I also find that if I don't immediately know an answer, if I think about it a little bit, then I can reason that some of the answers are definitely wrong (in a MC scenario), which helps my odds. Even in my Spanish class where our exams are written, in-class essays, I'm usually the last to finish. I don't think I've been one of the first done in a class since high school, TBH.</p>
<p>From my experience, those who finish the absolute earliest either did poorly or gave up because they didn't know the material. I'm sure that's not the case all across the board, but I haven't seen much evidence to the contrary.</p>