Rand Paul's cornerstone to success

[JollyRoger]

Rand Paul was talking with University of Louisville medical students when one of them tossed him a softball. "The majority of med students here today have a comprehensive exam tomorrow. I'm just wondering if you have any last-minute advice."

"Actually, I do," said the ophthalmologist-turned-senator, who stays sharp (and keeps his license) by doing pro bono eye surgeries during congressional breaks. "I never, ever cheated. I don't condone cheating. But I would sometimes spread misinformation. This is a great tactic. Misinformation can be very important."

He went on to describe studying for a pathology test with friends in the library. "We spread the rumor that we knew what was on the test and it was definitely going to be all about the liver," he said. "We tried to trick all of our competing students into over-studying for the liver" and not studying much else.

"So, that's my advice," he concluded. "Misinformation works."

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-truthiness-of-rand-paul-20131017

I have to admit that Rand has raised this art to a new level while on the Senate floor - almost as if he is on Cruz control.

 

[Borachio]

So he's talking about competitive exams? I thought they'd died a death.

I'd really rather have a pathologist who knew his subject rather than one who was in the top 10% but still didn't know much about it.

 

[JollyRoger]

In Kentucky?

 

[Borachio]

Home of the fried chicken?

Ah. There's your need for a pathologist.

 

[Hygro]

So he's talking about competitive exams? I thought they'd died a death.

I'd really rather have a pathologist who knew his subject rather than one who was in the top 10% but still didn't know much about it.

They are the norm at state schools. Most of my exams are curved against the other students.

This is really frightening on one hand but relieving on the other. It's frightening that he can think being evil is okay, but it's relieving to understand that we can operate with certainty rather than hesitance that he's someone who willingly and deliberately operates with evil.

Let's make this clear, his getting better grades on medical exams means that he's getting hospital positions based on machiavellian mischief rather than the merit of who is the more qualified doctor. His desires for prestige override any care he has for the health and wellness of people needing medicine.

 

[Borachio]

Actually standardization (if that's the right word) of exams is a tricky concept.

Examiners want to be sure that they're qualifying people to the same standard from year to year (within a certain allowable variation).

So, if they find that one year, say, the number of people passing the exam is significantly lower then they have to ask whether perhaps the exam they set was significantly more difficult.

Hence, there should indeed be some kind of competitiveness in many exams?

I still wouldn't like that to be the case for things like driving licence tests. And medical doctoring.

 

[Formaldehyde]

That is sound advice from a supposedly ethical Christian. Screw over your fellow students to help advance yourself because it technically isn't "cheating".

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Doesn't this make him a pathological liar?

 

[Lord of Elves]

Doesn't this make him a pathological liar?

Now we know the truth.

 

[Kyriakos]

Don't know about Rand Paul, but he seems less popular than his father, who had some internet audience going for a while. Maybe they both are not the best politicians around, but this only shows more clearly what most of the rest are like- some sort of mud vortex where countries are lost.

On another note, it seems the 'political debate/satire' is on a high level too:

Always heartwarming to see these kinds of attacks on someone.

 

[Tahuti]

I'm anti-government, therefore, I may do all bad things the government also does, being a necessary evil.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I have to admit that Rand has raised this art to a new level while on the Senate floor - almost as if he is on Cruz control.

Dont fix government, just screw government when Democrats are in power to make Republican government look good.

 

[dutchfire]

It makes sense that someone who grew up playing zero-sum games is now a member of the Republican party.

 

[peter grimes]

I can't believe he'd say that out loud - much less that he'd say it in that context and in this political climate.

That rug really pulled the room together.

 

[uppi]

So he's talking about competitive exams? I thought they'd died a death.

I'd really rather have a pathologist who knew his subject rather than one who was in the top 10% but still didn't know much about it.

How else are you supposed to judge the difficulty of any meaningful test? A rigid results to grade mapping would only be fair to the students, if the difficulty of the test could be kept constant. But those creating the test are often too well acquainted with the subject (as they should be) to be a good judge of what is easy for the students and what is not. So there needs to be at least some flexibility in the grade assignment to correct for misjudgments of the difficulty.

It only becomes problematic, when either the students to be tested deviate too much from the norm or when anti-social individuals like Rand Paul start to rely on the competitiveness of the test.

 

[peter grimes]

This is like the stupid Oscars, Emmys, Tonys, Miss Universe - all those things. Somebody is going to win in every category, no matter what. But that makes no sense!

How can 'Best Picture' mean anything if every single film that comes out in 2013 is utter crap? Doodie McPoodle and His Ashtray will be rated just as high as truly wonderful films, such as Crash, Shakespeare in Love, Titanic, and Ben Hur.

 

[Borachio]

How else are you supposed to judge the difficulty of any meaningful test? A rigid results to grade mapping would only be fair to the students, if the difficulty of the test could be kept constant. But those creating the test are often too well acquainted with the subject (as they should be) to be a good judge of what is easy for the students and what is not. So there needs to be at least some flexibility in the grade assignment to correct for misjudgments of the difficulty.

It only becomes problematic, when either the students to be tested deviate too much from the norm or when anti-social individuals like Rand Paul start to rely on the competitiveness of the test.

I agree. Pretty much.

Examiners want to be sure that they're qualifying people to the same standard from year to year (within a certain allowable variation).

So, if they find that one year, say, the number of people passing the exam is significantly lower then they have to ask whether perhaps the exam they set was significantly more difficult.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Why not assign hidden weight to the questions that are more important, with some of the easier questions randomly weighted?

 

[Borachio]

Or you could have randomly assigned questions for each student?

 

[uppi]

Why not assign hidden weight to the questions that are more important, with some of the easier questions randomly weighted?

Very bad idea: It should be obvious to the student how important a question is, so he doesn't spend most of his time on a question which gives almost no points.

Or you could have randomly assigned questions for each student?

That would make the problem even worse: Now you would have to asses the diffculty of the test for every single student. how are you going to do that?

If the test is merely about memorizing the answers, then there is not much difference in difficulty. But for most subjects that is a very bad way to test. For any test with new problems that require the students to think, it is very hard to meet a difficulty target.