This past Wednesday turned out to be extremely curious. We took an absolutely monstrous exam, next to which all our previous torments pale in comparison. In my memory, there have been only two truly terrifying subjects like this one: artificial intelligence(2 exams) and databases(2 or 3 exams). For databases, I barely scraped an automatic pass in all cases, and with artificial intelligence I managed to cope, but at the minimal level. The last exam in AI in my master's degree I passed with a record low grade for myself - a 41 .
But I'm not ashamed of it, because even so, barely making it, I made it into the top 1/7 of the students and received a scholarship.
The subject I'm talking about now is called Prasību inženierija, meaning Requirements Engineering. It deals with gathering and analyzing information from a software project client in order to develop fairly strict criteria for each element of the final product, known as software requirements.
Over the course of the year we were mastering various approaches to gathering requirements and theoretically we had to do 11 lab assignments. I did nine, which is actually quite good, since the majority did two or three. And here begins the most interesting part. Theoretically, based on the results of these assignments, almost 4 extra points get added to my exam score. So even if I pass the exam horribly, the labs will pull me through. As it turned out, it was very naive to think so. The result of the practical assignments is added to the exam result only if the exam is passed with a grade of 5 and higher! It turns out, if I pass the exam with a 4, I will just stay with this bad grade. But if with a 5 - I'll immediately get a final 8 or 9. There's a certain twisted logic to this, but it's pretty strange. It would still be understandable if they just sent you packing with a failing grade (1, 2, or 3). But apparently, such a sadistic setup is much more sophisticated and interesting.
The exam itself felt like an execution:
- Just as was promised at the consultation, each question was not on a single topic, but on all of them at once. Yes, that happens too. Perhaps in the humanities this is the norm, but not in engineering.
- It went on for 4 hours straight without the right to leave the room. Or rather, that right had to be negotiated separately the day before the exam.
- The assignment was dictated out loud, without a microphone, in a huge lecture hall, and in a language unknown to science, namely Latvian. I still can't get used to the fact that I study and speak latviski. If anything, the further I go, the more I lose the habit.
- The assignment was quite vague and hard to understand, especially in the practical part. As a result, my diagrams ended up being some kind of caricature of the RTU educational process altogether.
Ultimately, the impression we got was indelible. The students walked out enlightened, having instantly realized the truths of the Tao of Programming. How far this is from the vulgar sensations of a slacker who crammed on the last night! Even the best minds were shaken. A reevaluation of values occurred, the level of astonishment went off the charts past "FHAFC2". I've never seen all four of the most knowledgeable people in the group get thrown off balance, but this time it happened.
The conclusion is this - before graduation, they decided to show us one last time what a real exam and real studying at RTU is like. If we pass it on the first try, it will be unbelievable. And if I pass it with a 5, meaning 5+3=8, then I think I'll stop claiming so unequivocally that the world is logical. I will believe in miracles, because nothing else is capable of helping here.
1 In Latvia there's a 10-point grading system, 4 is the minimum passing grade.
2 FHAFC = fucking hell, just an absolute fucking clusterfuckP.S. The result will be on Monday. After the exam there was also a lot of interesting stuff, but more on that another time.