Friendship or the Honour Code?

 

Here’s one person’s opinion: ‘One of my students came back from the United States where he was on the exchange programme for half a year. One of the things he was amazed at was the ‘honour code’. He told us a story about Jack and Steve who were good friends. They were taking the same course in Law. On the day of the final exam, Jack noticed Steve copying answers from some notes he had hidden in his sleeve. Their university, like most in the country, subscribed to an ‘honour code’ that prohibited students giving or receiving assistance during exams and required students to report anyone seen giving or receiving such assistance.

Jack told Steve he sincerely wished he hadn’t seen him cheating, but having done so, he felt obliged to turn him in, even though Jack knew it would cost Steve a future in law.

My student said it was wrong for a person’s whole future to be ruined just because he or she cheated on one examination or paper. In any case such a punishment is too severe. Other students said they would never do that! Their opinion was ‘Friendship means much more than the ‘honour code’!’

 

Answer the following questions.

1. What’s your opinion about such an ‘honour code’?

2. Should students cheat on exams?

3. What would you do if you were Jack?

 

 

Is Being Friends with the Students a Drop in the Standards? 

 

Here’s one person’s opinion: ‘I think that teachers should be friendly with their students in order to create a positive environment to allow the students to feel free to confide in the teacher, and to give the teacher greater access to the feelings and needs of the students.

I think that lately there has been a real change in the quality of relationships; I think they are much more open, more relaxed and less formal. Some people would say that implies a drop in the standards, I would disagree violently with that. I think that quality relationships bring quality work. And familiarity does not breed contempt; care and control are not opposites. If you care for students you manage your classroom well, and it’s a well-ordered classroom, it doesn’t mean it is not a relaxed classroom, it’s not a friendly classroom, it’s not a supportive classroom.’

Answer the following questions.

1. Do you agree with the author that less formal relationships between teachers and students are not a drop in the standards? What is ‘quality relationships’ according to the author?

2.   Should a teacher be even-tempered, caring and fair?

What other characteristics should a teacher have?

 

A SORE POINT

 

In this text the author asks if you like the primitive methods of testing a person’s knowledge. Is it possible to think over anything more efficient and reliable than examinations?

It is common knowledge that examinations do not test what you know. That they more often do the exact opposite. They are a good means of testing memory, aren’t they? They can never tell you anything about a person’s true ability and natural or acquired talent.

Much depends on them. They are the mark of success or failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided on one fatal day. It doesn’t matter that you weren’t feeling very well, for example. Little things like that don’t count: the exam goes on. Success and failure are clearly defined and measured.

A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examination system does anything but that. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, but to keep his reading within limit. They do not make him able to seek more and more knowledge, but induce cramming (cause filling the head with facts). They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedom. Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching their subjects; they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they consider worthless. The best successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained.

     The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than subjective impressions of some anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they make mistakes. Yet they have to mark in a limited amount of time. They work under the same sort of pressure as the students. And their word carries weight. There must surely be many simpler and more effective ways of evaluating a person’s true abilities.

 To sum up, I suggest a number of arguments and counter-arguments on the issue discussed.

 

The argument:

 1. Exams remain a primitive method of testing knowledge and ability.  

2. Experts in education haven't thought out anything more efficient, reliable.

    3. Exams should test what you know, but often do the opposite.

4. Exams cause anxiety. They are the mark of success or failure. Our future is decided by them.

    5. Personal factors (e.g. health) are sometimes immaterial.

6. Education should train you to think for yourself; an exam system doesn't.

7. Most successful candidates are not best educated; they are best trained in techniques.

8. Results depend on the personal impression of an examiner.

9. Examiners are human: they may be tired, hungry. They may make mistakes, work under pressure.

10. There must be more effective ways of evaluating a person's ability.

 

The counter-argument:

 

1. Exams are a well-tried system. They offer the best quick way of assessing a candidate.

2. It is not always possible to do well relying merely on memory and exam techniques.

3. Exams are constantly being improved.

4. There are complex checking systems used by examiners to ensure fair results.

5. Computers are already widely used to mark specially devised tests.

6. The exam system may not be perfect, but it's the best we have; it may be painful, but so are many things in life.

(http://digital.library.upenn.edu/books/)

 

        Answer the following questions.

1. Which of the arguments and counter-arguments do you agree with? Why or why not?

2. What other arguments can you think of for and against examinations?

        

DISCUSSION POINTS

1. Why do people learn languages? Here is what students may say to answer the question:

 

a) I need English for my work, to pass an exam, to get a job.

b) I began learning English because my parents felt it was      

necessary for the future.      

 

c) I go to English conversation classes because I simply want to, not because I have to.

d) I would love to go on a tour, even if I had little money.

 

e) I learn English to socialize, to meet other races and cultures.

What about you? Why do you learn English?

2. The aim of language learning is learning to communicate successfully, that’s why you should listen to spoken English as much as possible. There are plenty of available sources of listening material: TV, films, video, radio, popular music, cassette stories, etc. People listen while driving along in the car, walking along or sitting down with a personal stereo, or lying in bed, listening to the music of the language. They listen and read, sing, read aloud into the recorder, then rewind and listen.

 Do you think it is possible to learn a foreign language just by hearing it and then trying to speak it? Do you have to practise your sounds and intonation properly or does it not matter in the least ( не играет никакой роли )?

3. Teachers say that if you want to achieve good progress in learning a foreign language you should take any opportunity to talk to your fellow-students - even just a few words and to try to say a bit more each time. ‘Be sensitive, be curious, and be polite! Ask questions, show you are interested, and tell them about yourself. Talk not just to practise your English, but to tell people how you feel and how you react to different experiences, and find out if they share your experiences and feelings,’ teachers say. What do you do to improve your English? What are the other factors of successful learning?