Most active commenters
  • ImPostingOnHN(3)
  • Izkata(3)

←back to thread

244 points rcarmo | 20 comments | | HN request time: 2.143s | source | bottom
1. inreverse ◴[] No.41911288[source]
Leaving aside the topics of authenticity and the questions' historical context, it's interesting that the article claims that "most" of the questions are impossible, while >80% have a single clear interpretation. For example, "draw a line under the last word in this line."
replies(6): >>41911324 #>>41911327 #>>41912775 #>>41913752 #>>41914252 #>>41914295 #
2. undersuit ◴[] No.41911324[source]
“one wrong answer denotes failure of the test”
3. tptacek ◴[] No.41911327[source]
Yeah? Which word do you draw the line under?
replies(1): >>41911387 #
4. happytoexplain ◴[] No.41911387[source]
Is there a word trick here I'm missing? I can only interpret it in the face-value sense of underlining the last word, "line".
replies(1): >>41911396 #
5. tptacek ◴[] No.41911396{3}[source]
Sorry, no votes for you; it was "word".

No, wait, you needed to underline every occurrence of the word "line".

Again, no idea if this test is real, just, that's the gimmick.

replies(3): >>41911435 #>>41911503 #>>41914168 #
6. happytoexplain ◴[] No.41911435{4}[source]
I get that the idea is that some questions create ambiguity using wordplay or subjectivity, but do you really think this is one of them? Your examples seem like a stretch even in the context of being unfair on purpose.
replies(2): >>41912754 #>>41912790 #
7. f1refly ◴[] No.41911503{4}[source]
A that point you might as well flip off whoever it is you're grading, and I get that this is the point of the test, but it's hardly the questions fault. The question has one clear answer.
8. reverius42 ◴[] No.41912754{5}[source]
Yes, because it is well known that these tests were in fact designed to be unfair on purpose (to a specific racial group). So it's not a stretch to think that these "unfair on purpose" examples are realistic.
9. cedilla ◴[] No.41912775[source]
More than 80%?

Ambiguous: 1 10 11 20 21 22 26 27 Ambiguous execution (e.g. "draw a line around"): 4 5 7 8 9 12 14 Easy on the face of it: 2 3 13 15 16 17 18 25 Nonsense: 6 23 24 28 29 30 Difficult to execute (e.g. "draw this complicated set of shapes in a small space while under time pressure without making any mistake"): 19

That's just my quick assessment and might vary for you but I probably took more than 10 minutes just to think about this. At best (and I was generous) 7 out of 30 questions are clear.

And that is assuming the questions have been formulated in good faith, which is evidently not the case. Question 2 could mean just as well instruct you to draw a line under the whole expression "the last word" in that line, or a line under "the last word in this line", or just under "line". Who's to say?

10. cedilla ◴[] No.41912790{5}[source]
There are three reasonable interpretations I see. The instruction is clearly to draw a line under something. That something may be whatever is followed by "under", so you underline "the last word in this line". Or "in this line" just narrows it down, so only "the last word" is to be underlined. Or the whole "last word in this line" is meant as an instruction to be interpreted, so it's "line". In that case, be careful not to underline the period, as sentence marks clearly aren't part of a word. Or maybe they are.

Oh wait, it could also refer to "the last 'word' in this line", so you would need to underline "word".

11. ImPostingOnHN ◴[] No.41913752[source]
How would you answer, "draw a line under the last word in this line"?
12. Izkata ◴[] No.41914168{4}[source]
> Sorry, no votes for you; it was "word".

If it was this, there would be quotes around "word".

> No, wait, you needed to underline every occurrence of the word "line".

If it was this, it wouldn't say "last".

This particular one is not ambiguous.

replies(2): >>41914965 #>>41915581 #
13. dyauspitr ◴[] No.41914252[source]
The don’t. In most, they ambiguously say draw a line “around” a letter or number. What is that? A circle?
14. cyrnel ◴[] No.41914295[source]
I think whether some questions seem straightforward is a distraction. Most of us on this site have been specifically trained on strategies for test-taking, giving us an unfair advantage that we false attribute to intelligence.

> I was preparing for my last major standardized test, the Graduate Record Exam, or GRE. I had already forked over $1,000 for a preparatory course, feeding the U.S. test-prep and private tutoring industry... I wondered why I was the only Black student in the room...

> The teacher boasted the course would boost our GRE scores by two hundred points, which I didn’t pay much attention to at first— it seemed an unlikely advertising pitch. But with each class, the technique behind the teacher’s confidence became clearer. She wasn’t making us smarter so we’d ace the test—she was teaching us how to take the test....

> It revealed the bait and switch at the heart of standardized tests— the exact thing that made them unfair: She was teaching test-taking form for standardized exams that purportedly measured intellectual strength. My classmates and I would get higher scores— two hundred points, as promised— than poorer students, who might be equivalent in intellectual strength but did not have the resources or, in some cases, even the awareness to acquire better form through high-priced prep courses. Because of the way the human mind works— the so-called “attribution effect,” which drives us to take personal credit for any success— those of us who prepped for the test would score higher and then walk into better opportunities thinking it was all about us: that we were better and smarter than the rest and we even had inarguable, quantifiable proof.... And because we’re talking about featureless, objective numbers, no one would ever think that racism could have played a role.

> Excerpt From How to Be an Antiracist, Ibram X. Kendi

15. GVIrish ◴[] No.41914965{5}[source]
That's not the point. The test giver has free discretion to say either answer is correct or incorrect. You could argue that if the intent was to underline "word" that it would have quotes around it, but it doesn't matter because the test is not supposed to be fair or consistent.

Things like this were at the heart of what Jim Crow was in America. Selective and capricious enforcement of the law to disenfranchise and disadvantage black people at best, enable unaccountable violence against them at the worst.

replies(1): >>41915068 #
16. Izkata ◴[] No.41915068{6}[source]
That's a different argument than what started this thread. Cheating administrators have nothing to do with whether that question is ambiguous or not.
replies(1): >>41915211 #
17. ImPostingOnHN ◴[] No.41915211{7}[source]
It's not cheating administrators, it's ambiguous questions with multiple possible answers.

As the judge of this test, I interpret your answer as incorrect. I expected the phrase, "the last word in this line" to be underlined. Test failed, no cheating required.

(Note that had you underlined the phrase, "the last word in this line", I would have still judged it incorrect, claiming that "word" or "line" should be underlined. Again, this requires no cheating.)

replies(1): >>41915250 #
18. Izkata ◴[] No.41915250{8}[source]
If it was this, there would be quotes around those 6 words, just like in your comment.

The quotes are needed to change this sentence from its clear meaning to these other ones.

replies(1): >>41915752 #
19. mrguyorama ◴[] No.41915581{5}[source]
>If it was this, there would be quotes around "word".

And who would you argue this to? The guy giving you the test who has the freedom to fail you for any reason they want?

There's no appeals court. These tests were not tests.

20. ImPostingOnHN ◴[] No.41915752{9}[source]
> If it was this, there would be quotes around those 6 words, just like in your comment.

If there were quotes around those 6 words, it would make the question unambiguous, sure. But without the quotes, my interpretation and judgement is still valid.

> The quotes are needed to change this sentence from its clear meaning to these other ones.

Actually, they are optional for that purpose, not required. Without them, the meaning is ambiguous. Just as you claim your interpretation is the "clear meaning", others have exactly as valid a claim to their interpretation being the "clear meaning".