egafd.com

Yeah, I did see that. Laughable wasn't the word.

I don't see why you have a problem with giving out marks for an answer. Isn't English language not just about spelling, punctuation and grammar, but also about expression, communication and creativity?

The answer 'fuck off' showed -for example- a number of possible feelings. He could have been expressing his frustration at what he thought a stupid question; his answer was a way of communicating his feelings to the question. It could also show irony and sarcasm too, and so giving the guy no marks at all would just give out the message that the examiners omitting marks due to his/her personal preferences, rather than how much effort the student had put in to expressing himself.

It's a question that has no right or wrong answer after all.

I know all the arguments for giving marks for it, Sam. Just don't agree with it, and it'll encourage the guy to do it again and again---particularly after the publicity.

A bunch of homos in Bristol are complaining that if the council cuts down a load of bushes, behind which they like to have sex with strangers, it will violate their Human Rights - NO it won't, you're just a bunch of dirty old cunts. These gays want to get some perspective on life - it's not normal to shag in the bushes next to a main road, except in movies. What a bunch of arses.

Coloured is a common usage term amongst older people to include everyone who isn't white - as if you didn't already know though.

I worked in a government institution in the 80's, one I'll not mention - but it held details of disabled persons. In the filing system they were recorded under the heading of Spacs! Even in those days, when racist jokes etc. were common place, I thought it was a bit off, although slightly humourous in a way, but surprisingly nobody ever thought it would be better to label them as disabled - and it wasn't my nature to get involved in affairs that didn't affect me directly.

Well, if he does it again then he won't really make much difference to his total score. 2/27 isn't much different than 0/27.

An examiners job, surely, is just to mark on the spelling, punctuation, creativity and how well the student expressed himself? Not to mark on what he/she finds pleasurable or offensive.

All i know is that English teachers try and encourage expression for eleven years during school, and if this is the only way the student could express himself then they have to accept the answer and mark accordingly. Zero marks for a question with no right or wrong answer would just be discriminatory, if indeed an answer was provided.

For instance, the question (marking out of 20 and taking into account the accuracy of the answer, punctuation, spelling and creativity):

Can you describe Alice in political terms?

If You answer: Fascist!

and Liz answers: Nazi

you get 10 points to Liz's 9 points as Liz didn't close the sentence with anything, while you used an exclamation mark (we all know you love 'em!)

I may answer: Exhibitionist.

Which, gets 15 points due to spelling a 5 syllable word correctly; however, since the question asked to describe him in 'political terms', I can -10, leaving me with 5 points.

Now, if you're decent at maths and have worked out you get 1pt for good spelling (upto 2 syllable words only), plus 1pt for good punctuation, what percentage of Alice is fascist?

6 months membership to for the first correct answer. !wink!

Wazza,

Come on now, enough's enough - admit it.

Sam's off on his hols and you're account-sitting for him while he's away.

- Eric