From: Yechiel Kimchi
Subject: Re: A discussion:
To: A student
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 22:05:58 +0200 (IST)

> Hello,
> 
> My name is "A student".
> 
> In the following paragraphs I would express some of my opinions about the
> administrative action you took this semester. The action referred is the
> decision not to allow students to transfer homework grades from previous
> semesters. The purpose of this letter is to convince you to change in some
> way your decision.
> 
> This letter was written after some thinking, and in an honorable way. My
> only plea is that you'll address it seriously, and reply.
> 
> 1. Facts: on 11/10/02 an announcement appeared on Matam website, stating
> that h.w grades would no more be transferred from previous semesters: "
> Starting from this semester, will we not transfer homeworks grades from
> previous semesters.
>       We have realized that it has an overall negative effect over the final
> grade of the students. "

True.

> 
> 2. No matter what I think about this decision, I acknowledge you have every
> right and legit way to carry it, as being the course head, as well as being
> the one who allowed this in the first place.

In fact, this semester I am not the course coordinator (Dr. Barequet is),
but I assume full responsibility for that decision and warmheartedly agree.

> 3. My discontent is only with the timing of this announcement. I will
> explain :
> As for this semester students, they now understand the rules for the
> semester.They now know that they wouldn't be allowed to transfer h.w grades
> in the next semesters, and no matter what use they would do with this
> information, they have the knowledge, they have all the facts.

No, this decision may change again - though I hope not.

> But as far for students from the previous semester and the one before it,
> they now learn that the rules had changed. Even though when they took the
> course they were informed that they would be able to transfer grades to the
> next 2 semesters, now they learn that they cannot.

That is plainly wrong - I guess a misunderstanding on your part.
Two semesters ago students were informed that if, at that time,
they had repeated the course from the two semesters before it
- they were able to transfer HW.
Nothing, I repeat *nothing* was promised to them about future semesters.

> 4. You probably would say that students should study the course as if the
> option to transfer grades is never available, trying to do their best
> efforts, but this is, in my opinion, is not the main issue here. I believe

I agree (not the main issue).

> that main issue that we're facing is fairness and equally conditions (good
> or bad) for students. By giving this options, by telling the students of the
> 2 previous semesters that they could transfer grades, you let them
> (knowingly or unknowingly, it doesn't matter) to use this option whatever
> way they see fit. Some made plans counting on this option and whether those
> planning's were smart or stupid, whether they were according to what you
> think is appropriate to do  - This you couldn't know . When the freedom to
> use this option is there, you can't control the way people use it.

Again, you assume that HW transfer is a promise for the future - but it is not.
If we decide, for example, that HW grades weigh 25% and not 30%
(as it used to be in the past - and may be in the future),
can a student that is repeating the course claim "but when I did it first
it was 30%, and I planned on having my HW (that I will do again) weigh 30%" ?
And yet another one will say "when I did it first it was 20%,
and I want my HW to weigh only 20% because I planned on doing them lousy
because I have no time to do them right!"  Can you see the absurdity?

You are right about fairness.  Students have the right to expect to have
the course at the same level of difficulty and at the same level of
knowledge acquirement.  This is the ideal.  But note what I did *not* say.
I did not say that they acquire *exactly* the same new knowledge!
In fact, this is the power of the academy - students are exposed to different
perspectives of the same subject matter, given by different lecturers.
With it come, sometimes, variations over HW issues.  So what?
As long as it does not go to the extreme, and as long as the final grade
can be considered as representing a valid and informative mark
about the student's knowledge - it is o.k.  Again, in our specific case,
if the student *must* take the course, because (s)he failed before,
we do them good by making them learn more (that was the rational).
OTOH, if they did not fail they have the choice: either not taking it
this semester (or never), or taking it and have better chances of
improving their grade.  And if the case in hand was the opposite?
That HW was not transferable in the past and now we give them the chance
*not* to do HW?  Then I support it too (and you have no case against it)
because it is within the authority of the lecturer to tell the students
"you are big children now, if you do not want to do HW and risk your grade
it is up to you!"


> 5. This is probably why you decided to change it. As stated in the website,
> you had come into a conclusion that this had a negative affect on this
> students final grades. As I said before , this is your right to change it
> and I don't doubt it.
> However, by changing the conditions for people from previous semesters,
> people that had different conditions upon registering the course, I believe

Not "upon registering".  They have registerred now and they know the rules.
(and they can still quit without any penalty.)
You meant "upon registering to the course the first time".

> you're damaging the principle of fairness between students.

Absolutely not!  Next, you will argue that HW should not count in final
grade in order to be fair and equal with course 234111.  Why not?

Suppose this decision changes back next semester.  Then look what
happens next Winter semester for students repeating MaTaM.
Students that are taking MaTaM first *this* semester, will have to submit
HW a year from now, but students that will take MaTaM next semester,
will *not* have to submit HW again (when repeating it next Winter)
because that was *their* original rule.  You end up with students
that take the same course with same exam and same staff, but have
different rules.  Is *this* your notion of fairness?

> I think, that the decision should include only people starting to learn this
> semester, and allow the last 2 semesters still to transfer their grades,
> considering the fact the decision were taken this semester.

I've already referred to that.

> Thus, students would know when they register the rules of the course, and
> not be surprised when rules are changed, affecting them, after they already

Rules that are "transferred" from semester to semester
are only the "Technion" rules (that may come from the faculty)
and are related to administrations (e.g, prerequisites for a specific course).
The decisions within a specific course may seem "administrative"
but they are related to the way the course itself is taught and conducted.
These decisions are taken new each semester - though some continuity
and coherence is advisable, and many times sought.

> took action based upon this rules.
> 
> By applying this new rule only starting this semester, students from
> previous 2 semesters could still actualize they option they were given (and
> not taken away) to transfer their grades.

Like I said: This option was not given to *them*.
It was given to the students that were repeating MaTaM at *that* time.

> 6. They are many examples, from the civil authorities , going through the
> military and the state rules, that express exactly this principle where a
> changed rule apply only from now and not retro.

Right.  In the past, prerequisites for OOP were "either PL or OS".
When this was changed to the prerequisite "PL only"  there were two semesters
where students with "OS" could still take OOP - because it was assumed
that at least some of them had planned their chain of courses in advance.
This is an example of a rule that is changed.

HW assignment procedures are not rules.  Period.

> My hope you'll agree.

You should know by now.


And since I have spent *more*than*an*hour* compiling this reply
you will have to accept my decision to put this correspondent
on my Web page.  I do not want to have to reply again on the same issue.
Your identity, of course, will remain hidden
(though I think there was nothing wrong in your appeal).


> A student

With all due respect
Yechiel