3 ms·
Introducing a slight bias factor that is randomized each time results in a lower average bias compared to a bias factor that is the same every time. Plus, as th
by dotnet00 3y ago
Introducing a slight bias factor that is randomized each time results in a lower average bias compared to a bias factor that is the same every time. Plus, as these weren't take-home assignments, I think someone finishing earlier is more likely to be either someone who was already going to score well, or someone who was already going to make the most common errors.
- withinboredom 3y agoI take tests extremely quickly, I either know the answer or guess it from what I know. I don't think about it. I was usually one of the first people to turn in tests. I was usually (almost always) the last person to turn in assignments, I like to be one of the last people out of a door or the last person in a line (I don't like crowds). Grading by order-turned-in would almost always mean my assignment would be one of the first or last one's graded. If I were to guess that if you did a frequency analysis of people to order, you'd find there were always a certain group who turned it in first, and another group that turned it in last.
- brewdad 3y agoYou need to find a classmate to be a chaos gremlin that randomly mixes up the pile when they drop off their assignments.
- JadeNB 3y ago> Introducing a slight bias factor that is randomized each time results in a lower average bias compared to a bias factor that is the same every time. That's what I'm saying—it's reasonable to believe that the submission time is correlated with other factors, such as ability or confidence (though the effect can cut both ways, with extremely able students submitting early because they finish early or late because they are extra careful, and similarly for other factors). Thus, this isn't really randomization, just correlation with another factor than the name.