Predicting a "needs improvement" vs. "acceptable" etc.

[McEngr]

Let's say one has a 4 part problem in the afternoon. What is your interpretation of "needs improvement". The reason I ask is because I feel that I aced a few problems with the exception of like half of a 4-part problem. Would I still need a "needs improvement" if there were say a total miss on a 4 part problem, but no deductions on the remaining 3?

I've heard a few posters on here claim that the grading is rather confusing, so I'd be interested in your comments without being a total downer on a Friday.

Thanks all.

 

[daedalus34r]

I would imagine a 'needs improvement' would be thoroughly completing all but one section. That one incomplete part of the problem could have some preliminary work but it struggles to find a solution path and of course does not come to a propper solution. I think we can all agree multiple incomplete parts of a problem would be a guaranteed 'unacceptable' rating. At this point it's very hard to figure out their tolerances.

But how about making slight errors in all the sections but they are fully worked out and come to numbers that are reasonable but not accurate? Could that be a pass or a 'needs improvement'.

At this point don't fret too much over it.

 

[kevo_55]

I don't believe that the grading will be so harsh.

Don't worry about getting 1 part out of 4 wrong McEngr.

 

[kozarrat]

I don't believe that the grading will be so harsh.

Don't worry about getting 1 part out of 4 wrong McEngr.

I agree. I don't think anyone can be expected to get all parts 100% right in the limited amount of time allowed. It should be about showing competency by taking a reasonable approach and demonstrating knowledge of design codes. I wouldn't want to go near any of the structures I designed or checked in the exam

 

[McEngr]

Me neither! Yikes! Minimal competency is not necessarily expected competency. Have a happy Friday all. It's sunny in Portland. Yippee!