|
Post by anacrusis on Jul 20, 2006 22:52:18 GMT
I suppose you could call it cheating a system which prides itself on quality control and reproducibility of results, though equally any board allowing it is clearly showing it has no fear of attempts to circumvent this. My main objection to the practice is more that people should balance their lives - if you make music the be-all and end-all, you forget to go and get the experiences with which real musicians inform their music-making.
|
|
|
Post by meepmeep on Jul 23, 2006 23:42:17 GMT
Definitely (IMO). One is sensible and understandable - the other is a waste of money and basically an attempt to "cheat the system" and something that suggests a candidate is not up to standard in the first place. In what way is this 'cheating the system' when the system allows for this? "cheating the system" is in quotes for the precise reason that it's not a very accurate way of saying it - I couldn't think of a better way to express it. IMO, the system probably shouldn't allow for it, and I am rather surprised in a way the AB does... though actually I think anacrusis's point that one could suggest the AB feels its quality control will hold up is a possibility... but if a candidate actually feels they need to enter twice in order to pass/get the mark they need, it strongly suggests they should not be doing the exam yet (to me, at any rate), or that they don't trust the exam board to examine them properly (which makes one wonder why they're taking it in the first place...). Yes, nerves can affect people (exams make me exceedingly nervous and definitely effect my performance) but personally I don't think that's a very good reason to enter twice... after all, part of an exam is to prove that one can perform under exam conditions (*shrugs* though if people have the money to burn then I guess that's their choice...)
|
|
|
Post by digby on Jul 28, 2006 20:47:16 GMT
This is an interesting topic to come back to after a couple of weeks hols.
I must be really naive as I never even realised this sort of thing takes place and I really don't see the point - mind you my attitude towards exams would not survive the HK exam culture I would never even consider a retake unless it was an important one for the student - grade 8, grade 5 theory etc.
I don't see anything wrong with it, other than the logistical problem for the board, and if you do it to get 2 examiners viewpoints, how annoyed would you be to get the same one for both exams?
However I would be really interest to see the percentage of 'first serves in' (to use tennis terms) I'd be really annoyed if I paid for multiple exams and got the highest result for the first one.
|
|
|
Post by katyjay on Jul 31, 2006 14:57:34 GMT
My twopenn'orth - I don't think it's cheating. But I do think it's a monumental waste of time, money and nerves. Doing any exam once is bad enough, but doing it again? No thanks!
|
|
|
Post by SuzyMac on Jul 31, 2006 16:07:51 GMT
Doing any exam once is bad enough, but doing it again? No thanks! Quite. Why would anyone put themselves through that - unless time was short and a university place (for example) was resting on a particular grade...but still if you're that close to missing out on what you need, it might be a double kick in the head if you failed twice. *shudders* I wouldn't quite call it cheating, but I'm not sure what I would call it.
|
|
|
Post by meepmeep on Aug 1, 2006 21:44:27 GMT
but still if you're that close to missing out on what you need, it might be a double kick in the head if you failed twice. *shudders* Good point - wouldn't that be hideous
|
|