This past Wednesday turned out to be extremely interesting. We took a simply monstrous exam, compared to which all our previous torments pale. In my memory, there have been only two truly terrifying subjects like this one: artificial intelligence(2 exams) and databases(2 or 3 exams). In databases, I managed to get an automatic pass in all cases with great strain, and with artificial intelligence I managed to cope, but at a minimal level. I passed the last exam in AI in my master's degree with a record low mark for myself - a 41 .
But I am not ashamed of this, because even so, barely scraping by, I made it into the top 1/7 of students and received a scholarship.
The subject I'm talking about now is called Prasību inženierija, that is, Requirements Engineering. It's about collecting and analyzing information from the customer of a software project 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 mastered various approaches to requirements gathering and theoretically were supposed to do 11 lab works. 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 works, almost 4 extra points are added to my exam score. That is, even if I fail the exam terribly, the labs will pull me through. As it turned out, it was very naive to think so. The result of the practical works is added to the exam result only if the exam is passed with a grade of 5 or higher! It turns out that if I pass the exam with a 4, then I will be left with this not-so-good grade. And if with a 5 - I will immediately get a final 8 or 9. There is a certain twisted logic to this, but it's rather strange. It would still make sense if you were sent away with a fail (1, 2, or 3). But, apparently, such a sadistic setup is much more sophisticated and interesting.
The exam itself resembled an execution:
- As promised at the consultation, each question was not on a single topic, but on all of them at once. Yes, this happens too. Perhaps in the humanities this is the norm, but not in technical sciences.
- It lasted 4 hours in a row with no right to leave the auditorium. Rather, this right had to be negotiated separately the day before the exam.
- The assignment was dictated out loud, without a microphone, in a huge auditorium, and in a language unknown to science, that is, 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 confusing, especially in the practical part. As a result, my diagrams turned out to be some kind of caricature of the RTU educational process.
In the end, the impression we got was indelible. Students walked out enlightened, having realized the truths of the Tao of Programming in an instant. How far this is from the vulgar sensations of a slacker who crammed on the last night! Even the best minds were shaken. A re-evaluation of values occurred, the level of surprise went completely off the "HFTC2" chart. I have 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 studies at RTU are like. If we pass it on the first try, it will be incredible. And if I pass it with a 5, that is 5+3=8, then I will probably stop stating so unequivocally that the world is logical. I will come to believe in miracles, because nothing else can help here.
1 Latvia has a 10-point grading system, 4 is the minimum passing grade.
2 HFTC = holy fuck, just a total clusterfuckP.S. The result will be out on Monday. After the exam, there were also plenty of interesting things, but more on that another time.