The whole thrust of the article is complaining about timed tests and some kids getting more time. That's doubtless unfair if some are overclaiming, but the real solution is to not do timed tests at all - they are only serving to produce an arbitrary bell curve so that some can have higher grades and get better career opportunities. Better to not have a timer at all, and let people's actual ability shine.

▲

throwaway314155 37 minutes ago | parent [-]

Realistically there has to be _some_ time limit. No one is going to sit in a room for 10 hours while you finish your test.

▲

clusterhacks 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Why?

How strong is the argument that a student completing a test in 1 hour with the same score as a student who took 10 hours that the first student performed "better" or had a greater understanding of the material?

	▲	throwaway314155 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Why? Teachers have lives, including needing to eat and sleep.

▲

dunk010 24 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Sure. I doubt that if some test at the moment takes an hour then you're getting much extra benefit at the five hour mark. The whole point of the time compression is to spread the grades out - along an axis different to "competence".