Some of the subjects I teach at TAFE are mind-numbingly easy, others can be quite difficult. Both for me to teach, and for the students to learn. Let's not kid ourselves, though, if you're a student at TAFE, it's unlikely you're Rhodes' Scholarship material. Chances are you'll never be "sent down" at the end of a debauched "hilary term"; more like you'll be "sacked" for being a "fat-head".
Cheating is rife, too. Last term there were two particular classes, one on Tuesday, the other on Thursday. I took the Thursday. It takes little in the way of imagination to realise the students doing the Thursday class were going to cop the questions off the students doing the Tuesday night class.
You should have seen the looks on their faces when they realised my test was different to the Tuesday test. Looking around, squirming, frantically turning pages; funniest thing I've seen in ages. Laugh? I chortled away like a half-wit; quietly, mind you. I didn't want to disturb their guilty writhing.
As it turned out the students in my class got the few questions from the other test almost %100 correct, and virtually NONE of the rest. Serves them right.
Also last term I taught one of the relatively difficult subjects. This subject is harder than Sesame Street ABCs, and largely without the muppets and singing, but not as difficult as rocket science. Coincidentally, I'm often heard cajoling a student (A student, mind you, with an IQ somewhere in the realm of Official Cretin) "Well, it's not rocket science, you know!" On a scale of one to ten, with one as Santa Claus Conquers the Martians and ten as Silent Running, I'm talking about a four. Somewhere around Battlestar Galactica (the TV version).
It's not in my interests to actively disadvantage the kids, though. Not the ones I like, anyway. So prior to the test I always scan the exam to make sure there are no nasty surprises. No questions that don't make sense. No questions with typos or incorrect maths. No questions that we haven't covered. This last is not as strange as it appears. Our tests are now set by a state board so there's a chance the central compiler, quite possibly a beauracrat working from a syllabus sheet and with no actual knowledge of the subject, could throw in a question completely unrelated to recent content. Quite often there ARE dodgy questions, which I'll then prompt to the kids in their last revision class.
You probably all know the drill. "Listen up, class! See this diagram here on Page 43?" ... blank looks ... "The one here." ... blank looks ... "In the middle of page 43." ... blank looks ... "HERE," I'll point ... blank looks ... "Well, THAT would be a good question to put in a test." ... blank looks ... "Next" ... "Week" ... "Test."
"Have we got a test next week, Sir?" Teacher bangs head on white-board.
It's quite stunning, and not a little discouraging, to find that more often than not, come the test, about half the class leave those questions blank. That's after I've told them NEVER to leave a space blank. Even the most absurd answers sometimes pick up a mark or two.
Then there are the smart-arse kids. "Sir, will you pass us if we buy you a slab each?" A slab is a box of beer, 24 cans.
Usually I play a straight bat. "No need, I've all but told you the answers. And, anyway, you'll find the test a piece-of-piss if you just do the work. And. Take. My. Hints."
"But I haven't done the work, Sir." As if I didn't already know that. As if I cared.
Time for the piss-take. "Well, guys, 24 cans each? That's only about $500 from the whole class. I don't come THAT cheap! Offer to pay my full salary for the rest of my working life and we'll talk."
I'm not completely stupid, you know. Not completely.
Which all makes David James Misell, 58 of Blackburn South and a teacher at Box Hill Tafe (Our opposition) a pathetic pin-head.
A TAFE teacher has admitted offering a student high marks in exchange for money.
In a case of "classic corruption", David James Misell, 58, told a student he would receive a 90 per cent grade for accounting in return for the money, the County Court heard yesterday.
Prosecutor Kevin Armstrong said the Colombian student approached Misell, a teacher at Box Hill TAFE, in February 2003 about missing an exam and asked how he could make up for it.
Misell told the student he was in financial trouble and said, "You help me and I'll forget the rest."
Mr Armstrong said the student was shocked and surprised by Misell's offer and contacted police.
The court heard police fitted the student with a recording device when he met Misell again a few days later.
Misell was recorded telling the student that for $800 he would receive a 90 per cent result on the subject, or 95 per cent for $900.
The pair arranged to meet again at the TAFE on February 20 where the money was to be exchanged.
Police arrested Misell as he waited for the money.
Dip Shit!
If the student was Columbian then I'm surprised he didn't ask for a kilo or two of white gold (not the metallic gold either...). (And yes that comment was tongue-in-cheek for the publicly educated.)
Pathetic pin-head is right. Geez.
Posted by: Rob de Santos | 05 February 2005 at 13:23
Good point, Rob. Hadn't thought of that angle. Maybe the cops are actually onto something bigger. Something sinister involving the chucking of feeble, dishonest operatives out of helicopters.
Posted by: Tony.T | 05 February 2005 at 13:27
Tony, you should totally win the teacher of the year or something.
I was thinking about you while I was out shopping earlier, actually. I know, I'm only human. We spotted a 4WD in the Safeway car park with the vanity plates "T. Tory" and I thought it might be you.
Posted by: Caz | 05 February 2005 at 17:56
Vanity plates are only for the mentally shallow and attention seeking driver....an extension of their manhoods if you like.
Posted by: Brett Pee | 05 February 2005 at 20:41
Never know, Caz. It might have been Tory Spelling. I agree with Brett. I'd like to heat up all vanity number-plates and use them to brand the owners' foreheads.
Posted by: Tony.T | 05 February 2005 at 23:45
Ritalin - it's my wife and its my life.
Are the exam questions multiple choice, Tony? You could dramatically boost your class test average by adding:
(e) don't know
as an extra option to each exam question. Mind you, if your students are lebs, they'll probably get that wrong too on account of being too busy copying off their crib sheets to read the questions.
As for the Colombian student, he didn't need to pay any money at all. All he needed to say was that Uncle Pablo would be very upset with Mr Misell if his nephew didn't get a high distinction in his Whittling 101 class, and Misell would probably have paid his student for the privilege of giving him a high mark.
Posted by: Clem Snide | 06 February 2005 at 01:32
I actually took the MC questions out, Clem. Too easy to cheat on them. If they haven't done the work, I don't want them to pass.
Cheating is strictly a non-ethnic pursuit at my school. It doesn't matter where the kids come from, all the lazy ones cheat.
Posted by: Tony.T | 06 February 2005 at 13:37
I think Australians with our anglo background get to uptight about "cheating".
It might be better to institutionalise it so that everyone can benefit. The ICC has shown the way on this kind of issue by changing the rules to permit chucking.
Posted by: SB | 06 February 2005 at 14:02
Don't get me started on chucking, SB.
Seeing Murali and Harby in the Sunday Age today congratulating the new rules is just about as much as I can take. This "Now I'm gald I can bowl my Doosra" business makes me sick.
I'm seriously considering whether I'll ever again post about cricket. I've already all but made my mind up never to go to the cricket again.
I'm a bee's dick away from saying "Fuck cricket!"
Posted by: Tony.T | 06 February 2005 at 14:12
Don't be a stick in the mud, Tony. You are sounding like some old curmudgeon who won't watch the pyjama game.
Posted by: SB | 06 February 2005 at 16:41
That sort of anglocentric Darrell Hair attitude would make you very unpopular at the universities in Sydney, especially when it came to foreign, full fee students.
A mate of mine has suggested that ICC could be spared its contortions in trying to legitimise Muralitharan by allowing one designated chucker per side. That bowler (but not the others) would then be exempted from being called for chucking. The umpire would be the sole arbiter of chucking. Thus Sri Lanka could be spared emabrrasment over Muttiah diMaggio, Pakistan over Akhtar, Australia over Brett Lee, India over the Turbanator, etc. Wisden would keep separate separate stats for bowlers & chuckers, while the Alan Border medal could have a new category. The entry of the chucker into the bowling attack could be heralded with great fanfare on the video scoreboard Dabbles-style, with a cartoon Muralitharan repeatedly flexing his elbow in a doosra action, and the PA announcer going "Heeeeeeere's Chucky!".
Posted by: Clem Snide | 06 February 2005 at 17:06
Tony, for Gawd's sake never say "Fuck Cricket", you have far too many intersting things to say on the subject- what with us about to embark on a new era and all that.Stuff Harby & Murali and their bloody 'Doosras', we'll beat 'em with our fair-minded cricks.
Posted by: Brett Pee | 06 February 2005 at 21:35
Nobody can be taught faster than he can learn. The speed of the horseman must be limited by the power of his horse. Every man that has ever undertaken to instruct others can tell what slow advances he has been able to make, and how much patience it requires to recall vagrant inattention, to stimulate sluggish indifference, and to rectify absurd misapprehension.
No point, just quoting the Great Cham.
Posted by: os | 07 February 2005 at 12:44
My students quote lines from pornos.
Posted by: Tony.T | 07 February 2005 at 21:42
Wave hello from the frozen north of Canada. Well, I'd agree with you that they don't deserve to pass if they've not done the work. Keep up the good work.
Toria
Posted by: Toria | 08 February 2005 at 11:13
"My students quote lines from pornos."
Wow, production values must be going way up on these things as they get more popular. Pretty soon they'll have plots and maybe even acting.
Posted by: Agammamon | 08 February 2005 at 13:33
I'd like to do that, Toria, trouble is, most of them don't even know WHAT Canada is! Let alone where. That's not a slight on Canada, mind you, just an indication that most of the kids are as dumb as a box of hammers.
Well, to be fair, Aga, none of the material quoted would ever make it into a Great Quotes almanac.
Posted by: Tony.T | 09 February 2005 at 09:56
When I was marking assignments at a certain academic institution where the penalties for plagiarism started with expulsion, (but where "collaboration" was encouraged), I found one effective way of dealing with the problem when people had "crossed the line".
"This is a pretty good answer, 8 out of 10. That means the 4 people who submitted it get 2 each."
They got the message, but as the lowest IQ of the students was something in excess of 130, my experience may not apply.
Posted by: Alan E Brain | 15 February 2005 at 01:34
Coincidentally, AE, all my students have IQs LOWER than 130. Lower than 30, in fact.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 February 2005 at 07:28
I like to watch.
Posted by: Far Car | 30 March 2005 at 09:54
The Universality Of Dumb.
Posted by: Tony.T | 30 March 2005 at 14:33