Teaching is a slow process of becoming everything you hate

>In a recent post, Parrhesia suggested that course grades should be 100% determined by performance on a final exam—an exam that could be taken repeatedly, with the last attempt being the course grade

>[...]I suspect this proposal hasn’t seen much contact with people who’ve actually taught classes

This is how a fair number of classes at my university are graded. Particularly math classes are structured so that you could literally ignore the class for 3 months and then just show up and take the exam and that decides 100% of the grade. Some homework is available for bonus points, but it only contributes to going from a failing grade to passing. While retaking the exam to get a higher grade isn't technically part of the system they will let you do it if there is space.

What’s wrong with doing the things that your more mature, logical self actually wants instead of what your younger, uninformed self thought you’d want?

There’s nothing stopping you from eating ice cream for breakfast, spending all of your money on Lamborghinis, and playing video games all day. As an adult you realize that those things won’t actually bring you true happiness and those decisions will cause significant negative consequences in the future that you’d rather avoid.

I don’t see what’s sad about that, other than maybe the disappointment of losing naiveté.

I get what you're saying but I also disagree with it as a generalization, and say it would depend on the subject. For theoretical subjects, an exam is about the only way to test your understanding. Memorization is not going to help you solve math problems.

As an advisor of PhD students I've learned that both things are important in different amounts. Much of what our education system measures right now is "willingness to work really hard from a young age." When I meet students from top-tier institutions I see a lot of this: it's really impressive. I also see a good deal of of selection for what I'd consider raw problem-solving ability. I see a smaller degree of selection for raw creativity.

The most creative students I've met have been the ones that didn't accumulate credentials, and often suffered because of (possibly undiagnosed) ADHD. They did well when they found their passion, either because they found it later in life or because they really, really cared about it. Our system doesn't do as well with these people, but they can usually make their way through.

Unfortunately there's a downside to this: all the creativity in the world isn't going to help you if you can't execute. A brilliant idea only takes you so far. And gaining sufficient background to have brilliant ideas is often an even more demanding task, which passion alone doesn't suffice for. I don't exactly know what to do about all this. What I do know is that a system that bases future success on how well individuals do at age 16 is fundamentally, profoundly stupid... And I wish I had a better one.

I feel that I have requirements that don't benefit students much or at all, but I just don't spend much or any time on them. At the end of my courses, I administer a test graded by me, so I can just not fail anyone. I know on day 2 if someone needs to be failed, when they do their first practical exercise. I'll probably have them removed from the course so as to not waste everyone's time, if that happens (but it almost never does.) I also have a very specific curriculum that is meant to be followed, but it's mostly not very good or focuses on things that are no longer major focus areas, because the development process lags so far behind reality. Again, I just do whatever I want, especially for practical exercises.

On the other hand, I teach another course that couldn't be more different. On the first day I give students every question to all the tests and tell them to start studying. If they can answer every question, they know plenty. I almost always give the same test, so different cohorts could (and, I'm quite confident, do) cheat by tracking which questions will be asked. I warn them against this, but ultimately I don't care because the final exam is not generated or graded by me, so it will be their predictable downfall if they go down the road of cheating.

You could reasonably say I neglect the second course; I do, for good reasons that mostly have to do with what I said about the first set of courses. I also the systems that provide education and training to my students relating to both courses, which further justifies my allocation of attention.