Hacker News Reader

Open-book exams should be ridiculously difficult, as they are intended to test understanding rather than rote memorization. Anyone can memorize a formula; figuring out when and how to use it is what the class should be teaching.

Similarly, in a programming class, the exam should not be testing whether or not you've memorized the Java boilerplate code. Sure, if you use it enough you will memorize it, but that's not what makes a good programmer. Either provide the boilerplate or let the students look it up; the focus should be on solving the problem.

> I feel if you agree to an open book exam the difficulty of the exam can (and should) increase dramatically. Be careful what you wish for ;-)

Most exams at Stanford CS are open book/open notes. I much preferred this to my undergrad experience of having to memorize stuff.

> my open book exams in Physics were ridiculously difficult. We would use all sorts of tricks to cram as many equations onto the double-sided piece of paper we were allotted.

Doesn't sound like it was an open book exam if you were just allowed a cheat sheet.

Real life is pretty hard too. We let so many people into university that difficulty almost necessarily has to drop in order to keep enrollment numbers up.

Did your school push you nearly hard enough?

Of course real life is difficult. My point was regarding open-book exams.