Marking

What happens when a student gets only 70% of the examination answers right but receives a score of 96?

I know this is a trick by assigning a total score of 137 instead of 100, now that I have read the book of the behavioural economist Richard Thaler, who had the temerity to let his students get a numerically higher score but the same grade. And that's not all, Thaler made a candid disclosure, printed in bold type, in his course syllabus: "Exams will have a total of 137 points rather than the usual 100. This scoring system has no effect on the grade you get in the course, but it seems to make you happier."

But ah - so what? All his students still felt happy. Alas, Thaler never got a complaint that his exams were too hard since then.

There is no way his students' reaction could be declared rational. One simple explanation is that humans are irrational. And we are.

To those of you who are addled why he chose the number 137, Thaler gives two good reasons. Ponder this: the average score will be most likely in the range of 90s, with some students even getting scores above 100. It doesn't take long to generate an ecstasy reaction. Second, his students won't bother to convert their scores into percentage when dividing one's score by 137 isn't that easy to do in one's head.  

To follow the example of Richard Thaler, I should perhaps make a statement too: "For those of you who have been unhappy with the scores, please don't read this blog. Lest you become less happy from learning about my new way of allocating total score, please forget what I've written."