Nobody knows
the age of the human race,
but everybody agrees
that it is old enough
to know better.
Author unknown
Actually,
Jews do know
the age of
the human race....

Major examinations have one or more proctors. The teacher is sometimes asked to be near the room to answer questions that cannot be handled by the proctor.

Smaller examinations have no proctor.

An observer may ask about the purpose and the placement of the teacher.

There are three possible options:

That the teacher should not be in the vicinity at all, because the test should be presented in a fair way.

That the teacher should be inside the room, together with the proctor, in which case one may ask why there is a proctor.

And there is the third option that the teacher should remain in the vicinity but should not be immediately available to answer questions, except for specified times or in a specified location.

Specific questions that are answered for some students but not for others offers the questioner an advantage.

In addition, students may get used to asking whether a particular answer is correct - and if not then which answer might be correct.

Students who ask questions about the content of the examination put the teacher in a difficult situation. After all, if the student did not understand the content of the material then any statement that the content is incorrect might be unfair.

In some cases, the teacher might tell the student whether his understanding of the material is correct. If not, then the student will ask sufficient questions (and they are getting better and better at this art) until he does understand the material.

At best this means that the student has learned the material during the course of the test.

At worst the student knows that there is no real reason to study intensively for a test because the teacher will reveal enough information for him to get the correct answer during the test.

Thus, students who are brazen enough to ask leading or direct questions will succeed on the test, whereas other students who are more reticent or who see that this method is wrong will score lower on the examination.

The dividing line between wrong and right becomes fuzzy in these situations. After all, if the teacher reveals the answer to a test question then who is to say that it is wrong?

In any case, the student learns that it pays to ask questions and receive some answers. At worst, he may not get the answer to his question. In other cases he will receive his answer - and there is no penalty for it.

We are thus training our students to become more and more brazen in their actions, behavior, and questions in order to succeed.

It does not increase their knowledge. It does not improve the fairness of the test.

How can we criticize them for following our training?