Xref: utzoo sci.math:5113 sci.physics:5158 comp.edu:1561 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!clong From: clong@topaz.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,comp.edu Subject: Re: "plug-n-chug" Message-ID: Date: 13 Dec 88 03:33:39 GMT References: <130@xenon.UUCP> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 19 In article <130@xenon.UUCP>, Tom Goodloe writes: > It is much easier for the prof to make and grade a test that is "plug-n-chug" > rather than thought-provoking. More types of tests: find-n-grind (you are allowed to use a formula sheet) drunk-n-flunk (obvious) try-n-die ("Maybe you are clueless, but give it that old college try") try-n-cry (same as above, but not as bad) joke-n-choke ("It'll be a piece of cake, hee hee") wail-n-fail ("I wailed on that test, in fact, I think I aced it") race-n-ace (the test is so trivial, you are racing to be the first done) -- Chris Long "The proofs are so obvious that they can be left to the reader." Lars V. Ahlfors, _Complex Analysis_