Should I feel bad I didn't do well on an exam like this?

[Mark44]

I agree with you that the standardised tests does mean something. But, the spirit of my argument in this thread has been to question whether it should, given its very obvious limitations I explained in its scope and with the anecdote.

Yes, they should mean something, at least until someone comes up with a better yardstick to evaluate a student's mastery of the material.

Well, life is short and everybody's personal temperament is different. After I reach home through all the traffic, I'm generally exhausted and fall asleep by 8 or 9. And I have to wake up at 4 the next day. I spent a lot of time and energy every day to study till fatigue generally overtook me. What do you know about my life, or what I do, or really anything to come on here and call me lazy ? So, with the very little amount of time and energy, that I had to study, I chose to spend it on studying what I like.

A sure recipe for failure or at best, a mediocre grade.

Sure, in hindsight, you could say I should have spent it on coursework. But, the irony was that if I was, then it would soon lose my interest and I wouldn't be able to spend as much time as I was in the first place.

Yes, you should have spent more time on the coursework, and less time on just those things that interest you the most. Once you have studied the topics that are listed in the syllabus, or are reasonably sure that you'll be tested on, only then can you spend extra time looking into topics that you find more enjoyable. If you prioritize things in the opposite order, you'll find that your grades suffer (which seems to be the motivation for starting this thread).

That's my personal temperament. I learn better when I am interested in the subject rather than interested in what I can do with the knowledge of a subject (Like clear a standardised test that 'gatekeeps' something.) . The latter has not been a good motivator for me.

For example, consider the Pigeonhole Principle. I spent a lot of time and energy studying the Pigeonhole principle and did many problems on it with rather advanced difficulty. But, in the final exam, only an elementary 3 mark question was asked. It didn't test any of the knowledge I had acquired and since many would score those three marks it would be easy to conclude that everyone is equally competent with the Pigeonhole Principle, which it isn't.

Did you have any reason to believe that the test would cover only the Pigeonhole Principle? If not, becoming the class expert on this principle was a foolish choice.

The Spanish-French analogy is a bit misleading. It's more like a Spanish class starts, and then excited by Spanish language, one dwells deep into their history and their culture, the origin of some of the words with pleasing sounds from Latin(if that's the language Spanish is derived from. I don't know much about this.) and their original meanings, studies a bit about its grammatical structures but doesn't do well on the test because he didn't build his vocabulary enough. (Even though he will have a deeper understanding of the language both because it is motivated from interest and not gain, and because there's a deeper base of knowledge, and speak it better in the long run.)

I disagree. You will not have a deeper understanding of Spanish if you haven't spent time learning the vocabulary, verb conjugation, verb tenses, et cetera. You are deluding yourself if you think that knowing that a few words are derived from Latin and a few are derived from Arabic or the history of Spain will allow you to speak the language better "in the long run."

In any case, the analogy given earlier was that a student was taking Spanish, but decided on his own that he wanted to study French. The question was, should the student be given a good grade for the Spanish class?

I never did any of this to 'rally against the system' and to prove a point. I spent time studying what I liked because I liked it. For the love of learning. Simple. It's only at the end of this semester I realized that my studying for pleasure has been punished by the system.

A better way to think of this is to recognize that your weren't rewarded for choosing to study what you fancied instead of what was expected of you in the course.

Learning has been reduced to a business-like job that needs to be done with required specifications much like an industrial product. If the specifications are met, the reward is glorious marks ! If they aren't, then the marks aren't given.

Welcome to the real world...

My whole point here is that that is all marks do. They aren't a true gauge of competence or knowledge. Merely the preparation for them. Marks end up rewarding the outlook of learning in order to fulfil certain requirements over the outlook of learning for pleasure and going happily where the love of learning leads naturally. I'm not sure that should be the case.

Everyone who has responded in this thread has said that, if you ignore the published requirements for the class (as described in the syllabus), but choose instead to do what pleases you instead, you shouldn't expect anything more than a middling grade.

Because when you learn because you want to and not because you have to you learn more and remember it longer, and that would make for better research or job performance. You're more likely to remember, retain and use it later in life. But, if everyone studies only what they have to, and postpones what they like to a later time that never arrives, they aren't likely to remember it for long because there isn't any emotional connection to the knowledge other than exam stress notwithstanding exam success.

Exams are a good way of gauging if someone can get the job done if they know what is expected of them. But, I don't think it is a good way of gauging the knowledge of understanding of the domain it tests because someone who knows a lot about the domain may not have succeeded due to other factors like poor planning, foresight and prioritising.

At no point in time, did I consciously decide not to study some of the content of the course. Whenever, I have to decide what to study, I generally choose to go for what I like. I never made a conscious long term choice to not study some topics. It's a choice that end up being made by time's strict hand. And, yes, I guess I struggle with long term thinking and planning and prioritising. So, generally I chose to spend time in the present studying what I wanted and postponed studying for the exam later, which somehow never happened. Rather than do it the other way around. But, it's something I'll try to change this semester.

It annoys you that I choose to study what I like in the order of my interest, curiosity and passion in the true spirit of learning, rather than follow an outline prescribed by someone else to be rewarded with marks like a rabbit chasing a carrot on a stick ?

It doesn't annoy us (if I can speak for the others here) -- what is annoying is that you have described your situation where you're receiving a low grade in the class, and refuse to accept the consequences of your choices. We don't care that you choose to study X when your course is about Y. What's bothersome is your whining about how unfair the system is, how unfair exams are, etc. etc.

Frankly, I'm someone on the Internet you've never even met. I don't understand why anything I do with my life should annoy you, or why you're getting personal here.

 

[Mark44]

In answer to the question in your thread title: Should I feel bad I didn't do well on an exam like this?
Yes
Since the question has been asked and answered, I'm closing this thread.