Update 2021-6-29-semester-review-spring-2021.md

_posts/2021-6-29-semester-review-spring-2021.md

@@ -15,7 +15,8 @@ As per the new Spring Semester Completion Plan(SCP), the admin approved the prop
 
 Assignments are a routine exercise that several professors employ to achieve a CWS metric. However, the last semester witnessed a lack of transparency as far as grading the assignments, and grievance redressal was concerned. It was seldom the case that students received the assignment marks and could get them rectified in case of any discrepancy. Instead, assignments were sent to professors via mail or other platforms in many courses without any acknowledgement. The grading was not done on an assignment-to-assignment basis but was instead carried out hurriedly at the end of the semester. This meant that students had no clarity on how well they performed in the CWS and had to rely on the final result to know how much they actually scored, directly affecting their verdict to drop courses or take S grades, and ultimately their final CGPAs.
 
-A major problem arose once the ETEs were cancelled. The existence of multiple courses without any CWS or PRS assessment meant that the professors had to take urgent steps to evaluate their courses. Citing reasons such as academic dishonesty and indulgence of malpractices, the already issued assignments were replaced with many new ones. The issues of transparency percolated to these assessments as well. The continuous evaluation paradigm in certain courses was replaced by several quizzes held at once to cover up for earlier weeks. It all led to increased stress among students, as they had to attempt multiple assignments and quizzes, with no method to question their transparency or weightage, which was left to the professor's discretion. Not only that, grading for quizzes remained highly unreliable due to lax proctoring and the use of dishonest means, which meant that anyone who did not indulge in such practices was at loss. In many cases, professors' evaluation policies were not in agreement with institute guidelines for the online semesters. It is to be noted that while these policies
+A major problem arose once the ETEs were cancelled. The existence of multiple courses without any CWS or PRS assessment meant that the professors had to take urgent steps to evaluate their courses. Citing reasons such as academic dishonesty and indulgence of malpractices, the already issued assignments were replaced with many new ones. The issues of transparency percolated to these assessments as well. The continuous evaluation paradigm in certain courses was replaced by several quizzes held at once to cover up for earlier weeks. It all led to increased stress among students, as they had to attempt multiple assignments and quizzes, with no method to question their transparency or weightage, which was left to the professor's discretion. Not only that, grading for quizzes remained highly unreliable due to lax proctoring and the use of dishonest means, which meant that anyone who did not indulge in such practices was at loss. In many cases, professors' evaluation policies were not in agreement with institute guidelines for the online semesters. It is to be noted that these policies were not implemented in every course and that there were better policies implemented by many professors, just that these acts were widespread enough to warrant concern.
+
 
 While a better mutual understanding between the professors and the students could help deal with such matters, the administration should have laid out better and more comprehensive guidelines regarding this as such issues were bound to happen.