From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: Larry Weiss Subject: Re: Any research putting c above ada? Date: 1997/05/09 Message-ID: <5AB7287E9247441B.B61EDFD34B8F49B0.FCD25A82E03921C6@library-proxy.airnews.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 240605815 References: <5ih6i9$oct$1@waldorf.csc.calpoly.edu> <5k60au$gig@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> <5k88f8$387@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> <5ku5tj$9d9$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> X-Orig-Message-ID: <33736ECB.64F1@oc.com> Organization: ... NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library.airnews.net Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-05-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Richard A. O'Keefe wrote: > eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) writes: > > But in reality it is the responsibility of the students to get the > >knowledge that they need. > > I've just had a student in my office who was extremely annoyed. > He had submitted his assignment electronically in two parts, > and his second submission had caused his first to be deleted, > hence his low mark. He was *outraged* at the suggestion that > he ought to have read the on-line manual for the electronic > submission program. I pointed out that he _ought_ to read the > manuals for _all_ the programs he used, and he was vehemently > opposed to that view. In his view, he was paying us money, > and he shouldn't have to read _anything_ that wasn't in the > printed handouts. It was a very upsetting meeting. > > Some students are rock solid *certain* that it *isn't* their > responsiblity. > Give the student a break! Your mechanistic treatment of this scenario is very upsetting. You have a student that you know acted in good faith to compose what he/she needed to provide to qualify for a total submission, yet you seem to take satisfaction (that's my take on it, I may, of course be wrong) in frustrating this person. I'd say that if they could quickly resubmit the missing portion, then what's the harm in accepting it? I hope the situation hasn't gotten out of control where you two can't come to a good outcome on this. Good luck!