I (Hale Bradt) have been asked by a number of students for some guidance on
taking the final. I usually answer with standard points most of you know
anyway. But here they are:
Do not panic if a problem seems difficult: write down the physics you
know that applies to the situation and then go from there. At the least you
show what you know and may earn partial credit. It could also lead you to a
full solution.
Allow time for each problem so that you can get partial credit (at
least) on each one.
Check your work as you go along to catch silly mistakes before they
become enmeshed in the later steps.
For this test in particular, you should try (or at least read) each part
of each problem, even if you had difficulty on the previous parts. In some
cases a part is not dependent on the earlier parts.
If you are stuck, state any assumptions you wish to make that will allow
you to proceed with a problem.
Stay cool; nervousness will only hamper your work. You will have done
all you can, so you can leave it up to the fates now.
I wish each of you the best of luck on the Exam. I will always remember
warmly the class of 2004 as the last class I lectured as a full time
faculty member.
Hale
Note: please leave early for Johnson as finding the front door is not
particularly easy with all the construction around.
The mean grade was 73. The level of ``Adequate Performance''
(lowest C grade) was 65.
The solutions are now available in Room 4-339B.
Persons with grades below the 65 level should try to attend tutorials these
next couple of weeks.
Look up tutorial times for your tutor (by alphabet)
on this web site and email him or her to establish meeting times.
Persons whose average on the three tests falls below the typical C-D line
should realize that neither the class quizzes nor the final exam grade are
yet factored in. These amount to 55% of the overall grade. Hard studying
for the final can make a significant difference.
We hope you enjoy the excitement of these last few weeks when we see how
Maxwell's equations bring us to a theory of light!!
We have heard several inquiries about how we decide grades. We have also
heard concern about the closeness of the advertised C-D line (67-68) to the
mean (73 and 75) in the last two one-hour tests and that this might imply a
large projected failure rate. We hope the following will dispel the latter
concern.
We do not give a priori correlations between test scores and grade levels
because tests may vary in difficulty. However we strive to create tests for
which a student with good understanding would obtain a grade above 75 or 80
and for which a student with barely adequate understanding would obtain 65
to 70%.
The criteria by which we will eventually give letter grades (hidden or
otherwise) are those of the Institute (see pages 80-81 of the Bulletin for
a full description):
A. Exceptionally good performance. . .
superior understanding. . .
B. Cood performance. . . good understanding. . .
C. Adequate performance. . . adequate understanding
D. Minimally acceptable performance. . . partial familiarity
For each of the past two one-hour tests, the faculty in the course have
examined the test and the detailed grading of the individual questions in
order to determine the C-D line. They determined that grades below 68
should be below the C-D line, or in the words of the Bulletin, such grades
do not represent ``adequate understanding''. (In each case, this assessment
is based only on the one test in question.) Indeed this placed a large
number of students in a questionable position, about 30% of the class on
each test. We were gratified, though, to find that about half of these
students did better on the other of the two tests.
Unfortunately, about 15% of the class had grades that fell below the C-D
level on both tests, and we are indeed quite concerned about their eventual
performance in the course. We have encouraged them to change their study
methods and to seek help and advice from their advisors, 8.02 tutors and
instructors. Many a student has made a major improvement in the last weeks
of a course they chose to concentrate upon. Students should keep in mind
that more than 50% of the course credit in the current 8.02 will be
determined by forthcoming class quizzes, the 3rd hour test, and the final
exam.
The mean grade was 75. Again, the level of unsatisfactory or marginal
performance is less than 68. In other words, this is the C-D boundary,
based on this test alone.
Persons with grades below this level should begin attending tutorials
immediately; email your tutor
suggesting your preferences of times.
Persons with grades equal to or above 68 need not attend tutorials but may
do so if they wish. If you intend to stop already scheduled tutorials,
please notify your tutor.
I, regretfully, made a formal error in the statement of the current slab
problem in lecture today. I intended and argued as if there was symmetry
about the central y = 0 plane. That is, the current density is maximum at
the center of the slab (at y = 0) and decreases in magnitude exponentially
toward both the upper and lower edges. Thus I should have specified the
ABSOLUTE VALUE of y in the expression for the z component of the current
density: j_z = j_0 exp[-|y|/a].
With this correct statement, everything I did thereafter is correct.
We collected evaluations forms from those in lecture Monday, 19 March.
If you were
NOT in lecture or did NOT turn in a form, we would like to have your
opinions of the course. Please
fill in the form provided here
and it will be sent
to the course manager, Alicia Duarte, anonymously. Thank you.
I have taken the liberty of nominating myself and 8.02 for the Big Screw
Contest. You vote by giving money which goes to the charity I designate. I
chose the MIT Community Service Fund which is used by MIT students and
others to do social work locally, e.g. in Cambridge schools. I ask for your
vote so we can help the MIT Community Service Fund. It helps MIT students
do good work.
I am retiring this year and never have won the Big Screw Contest. You can
vote for me or for 8.02 for any reason: the course or professor you hate or
love the most, or just because I chose the best charity. So LET'S BEAT OUT
THOSE OTHER COURSES. VOTE and HELP GET OUT THE VOTE THIS WEEK IN LOBBY 10.
Any contribution helps.
The contest is run by the APO which is the MIT service fraternity, a
student organization. Below is part of their official blurb.
Thanks,
Hale Bradt
APO Big Screw Official Rules
Description
The Institute Screw Contest, popularly referred to as ``Big Screw,''
is an annual charity fundraiser at MIT, sponsored by the Alpha Chi
Chapter of Alpha Phi Omega. In addition to raising money for charity,
the purpose of this contest is to recognize prominent MIT faculty and
staff members, and to promote MIT community spirit.
Officiating Body
A committee formed before the start of the Contest will be the
officiating body of the Contest. The committee will consist of the
Contest Chairman, the Chapter President, the Chapter Service Vice
President, and other individuals selected by these three persons. All
decisions of the committee will be final.
Donations
Monetary donations in the names of nominees (except Non-Associated
Persons, see Section 5.c below) will be accepted only at
the official Contest booth during official Contest hours. Money that
has been donated toward any nominee may not later be refunded or
transferred to another nominee. Any donation that is not U.~S.\ currency
becomes property of the Alpha Chi Chapter of Alpha Phi Omega and does
not count towards any candidate's total.
Contest Booth
The booth will be located in Lobby 10 on March 12. Booth hours
will be 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily. The contest will officially
end at 5:00 p.m. on March 16. No donations will be
accepted after this time. These dates and times will be publicly
available, and will be subject to change without notice. Candidates
may not work in the booth nor interfere with the workings of the
booth.
Please note in the Organization notes that every other recitation section
is a Discussion session for that week's assignment. There can be no mutual
discussion unless the student (and the Instructor!) have prepared in
advance. I am reminding the Instructors that they can expect you to have
done some preparation for these recitations -
as outlined in the Organization. He or she can,
and may, ask you to show/explain what you have done and what is clear or
not clear to you.
For their part, I am asking the Instructors to begin the discussion of the
new material promptly on the discussion day. In this way the two-way
discussion for which you have prepared can take place fruitfully. It also
helps the class keep up with the course.
It is not possible to cover completely everything in recitation, so you
must be prepared to use the non-class hours to gain and master the
necessary expertise in the concepts and problem solving. Last Spring, the
students estimated they spent
only 3.0 hours on average outside class on
8.02. For most students this is NOT
sufficient time to adequately master the material. For many it can mean
serious trouble.
I caution you that ``hours'' alone is not the answer. While it is important
that you wrestle with the concepts and problems yourself, you should not
spend excessive time making little progress on any one problem or idea.
Discussion of the course material with friends or a tutor is a very
efficient way to clarify material that you have already wrestled with.
The recitation quizzes can take significant time away from discussion. I am
suggesting to the instructors that they try to make the quizzes relatively
brief, even as short as a 5 or 10 minutes. One student suggested that if
the quiz is in the middle of the hour, there will be time for questions
beforehand and discussion of the solutions afterward.
The goal of these suggestions is to help make the recitations more
productive for you. Please feel free to make your own suggetions to your
Instructor, or to me.
Solutions:
The solutions of the first hour test are now available. They are in the
handout room, 4-339B.
C-D Line:
The numerical grade corresponding to the C-D boundary for each problem was
chosen by the several instructors grading a given problem, after they had
graded a few papers to standardize their grading. In other words, it is an
objective a priori level that is not influenced by the grade distribution
(``curve''). The sum of the three such scores yields a cutoff of
68/100,
below which we consider the performance to be marginal or unsatisfactory.
This cutoff is the C-D boundary, based on this test alone.
Mean Test Grade:
We now know that the mean of the test grades is 73 out of 100.
Required Tutorials:
If you received a grade of
less than 68 you are expected to attend
tutorials
for the next few weeks at least, until the results of the next
test are known. You should
email your tutor
and give your top three
choices of the
hours he or she has posted
and start attending next
week.
You should also
see your advisor
to discuss your overall
academic situation.
Improvement in your understanding can follow from a change in your study
habits, in your approach to the homework, or even because you read the
assignment before lecture(!).
I congratulate those of you who did well. I encourage the students who did
less well by stating that many of you did learn a significant amount and
that it is possible with a little extra effort to improve one's level of
understanding dramatically. It is often done. Keep in mind, also, that the
hour test is weighted only 15% in your final average; future work can make
a big difference.
There is a need for an 8.02 student to take lecture notes for use by a
fellow student with a disability. A volunteer for this task will be paid
for his or her time. If you are interested, please contact the Disabilities
Service Office in E19-225, phone 3-1674, or email dso-www@mit.edu. You
could also talk to Prof. Koster.
The tutorial hours for Iliya Sigalov
(for students with surnames in Taq-Z range)
have been changed to provide hours
that are more accessible to students. See
tutor assignments and hours page.
We did not mention in the previous materials that the tutorials will often
have 2 or 3 students in them. We hope this works out well for you.
Even though the deadline for signup has passed, you may commence tutorials
at any time by emailing the tutor for your part of the alphabet with
suggested hours.
Please note that we do not allow students to switch their tutorials from
tutor to tutor, except when conflicts are unavoidable with permission of
Prof. Koster. However, you may switch hours with the same tutor, if your
tutor agrees.
Students are expected to be prepared for the first recitations so they
will be of the maximum utility to the student. Please do the problems
in the Math Handout (see Assignment) and get a start on Assignment 1.
The first recitations are on Tuesday, before the first lecture.
This is to announce the availability of a Mathematics Supplement handout
for 8.02. It should prove helpful to students taking any version of 8.02
next term who have completed 18.01 but not 18.02 as of this coming
February.
The Handout covers topics (Series Approximations and Integration) that are
used early in 8.02 before they are presented in 18.02. Even though the
material needed will be developed as needed in 8.02, a few hours spent on
this material in advance could substantially ease the transition into 8.02.
We suggest you do problems A1,2 and B1,2,3,5 before the first recitation.
If you will have already completed 18.02, the Handout would probably have
little value for you.
The Handout is now available in the Physics Handout Room 4-339B (or
as gzipped postscript or
PDF document here).