Gyudon

06-24-2011, 10:03 AM

So yesterday, some people were hyperventilating about whether or not 5 PM = 5a + 5b. As always in these high stress scenarios some accusations of trolling were also made. The overwhelming majority seems to believe equally qualified candidates will pass whether they took the full or the halves.

Consider these two scenarios.

Scenario 1:

One group takes full 5. 15 minute reading period, 4 hour test.

Scenario 2:

Same group of equally knowledgeable people also study for a full 5 but get to take it in two pieces, say 5a one day with a 15 minute reading period and 2 hours, then 5b the following day after a full day's rest. Again they get 15 minutes and it's 2 hours.

Clearly scenario 2 is more favorable. You have to be intellectually dishonest to say the advantage is zero or virtually nonexistent. Some people claimed the advantage is 7.5 minutes but that's misleading since that's only true per half so really you get a whole 15 minutes of thinking time. In reality, the difference is even worse than scenario 2 since only half the material needed to be studied for a half 5 over a span of 3-5 months.

For practical reasons it may be impossible to adjust for this inequity without pissing on MQC or screwing over people who passed the old 5 or 6. So I feel much more indifferent now about whether 5 PM should = 5a + 5b. However, I am certain that the same people taking full 5 would get lower aggregate scores.

Consider these two scenarios.

Scenario 1:

One group takes full 5. 15 minute reading period, 4 hour test.

Scenario 2:

Same group of equally knowledgeable people also study for a full 5 but get to take it in two pieces, say 5a one day with a 15 minute reading period and 2 hours, then 5b the following day after a full day's rest. Again they get 15 minutes and it's 2 hours.

Clearly scenario 2 is more favorable. You have to be intellectually dishonest to say the advantage is zero or virtually nonexistent. Some people claimed the advantage is 7.5 minutes but that's misleading since that's only true per half so really you get a whole 15 minutes of thinking time. In reality, the difference is even worse than scenario 2 since only half the material needed to be studied for a half 5 over a span of 3-5 months.

For practical reasons it may be impossible to adjust for this inequity without pissing on MQC or screwing over people who passed the old 5 or 6. So I feel much more indifferent now about whether 5 PM should = 5a + 5b. However, I am certain that the same people taking full 5 would get lower aggregate scores.