Reply: IITMOD: Most frequently received queries in the last 1 week
Z0rba
Respected IITM Team,
1. First of all there was no mention of in discrepancies amongst the two shifts and the respective papers. Kindly consider this strictly from a POV of shift 2 candidates.
2. Tough, as I gather from reading off of other member’s concern on the discussion forums the toughness was referred to most of them as the lack of time and poor emphasis on lengthy mug up questions rather than quality of conceptual questions- (as it should have been an equal spread amongst all subjects whereas CT was childishly easy) not the actual conceptual toughness which was clearly implied in the reply mail and most of the working professionals were told to suck-up and get ready to become mere calculators and up and coming fresher were told employers would not listen to what you have to say or they would be dumb to just tell you finish something in a non-justified time manner whilst maintaining rigorous standards which is on your part really silly like come on could’ve replied better there!!
3. It felt like some diplomat’s reply regarding a political situation in which they do not refute the points mentioned directly whilst acknowledging the flaws in the sense we will improvise in future. If you feel the papers were designed to the standards boasted (which is completely not the case) in the live sessions why is there a need for taking our opinions now into account in the first place? By stating- “Having said that, from our side, we will keep exploring other meaningful and practical ways to assess skills and learning.”
4. Finally, to the IITM paper setting team kindly reply to me directly after carefully listening to Prof. Andrew’s vision for the quality of qualifier exam in the earlier live sessions in pre-courseware release sessions. Kindly reply here or in mail I would very much want you explaining me how the question paper for the shift 2 fits within those standards and question wise give me an estimate of your calculation on percentage of conceptual, mechanical and so called “speed – testing” questions as poorly stated in the reply, This is total rubbish, what speed? You need us to be calculators or some conceptually sound students? Would love to get in with your justification.
PS. Regarding the decision I could care less about outcome I am here for learning new things -all I need is quality of education not quantity. It’s the beauty of IT sector a student has hypothetically infinite excellent learning modes so I care less about the outcome and welcome whatever IITM decides, all I expect is quality in each and every aspect of this courseware, no compromises anywhere. This is what I genuinely expected from such a premier institute, alas! You guys contradicted yourselves with the qualifier exam which was really a poor show on your part! Kindly seriously look into this for future examinations or intakes!
Warm regards,
Anonymous well- wisher
