Detailed Solution to Midterm Examination (F2011 Micro Principles)

★★★ Detailed Solution to Midterm Examination ★★★
Fall 2011 Instructor: 衛忠欣 (Jong-Shin Wei)
經濟學(一) (Principles of Microeconomics) (07)342-6031 ext.6222
Dept. of Int’l Business Administration WUCL jsw12011958@gmail.com
3:00 pm ~ 4:20 pm, Monday, Nov. 7, 2011
Open books/notes exam (excluding texts written in Chinese). Absolutely no talking nor borrowing items during exams.，可使用自己的資料(中文課本除外)、字典或翻譯機。行動電話若響起，該生扣十分、以強調基本禮貌。務必工整依序作答。題目較多，目的在於測試是否有平日閱讀英文資料之習慣。3:40 pm後，不可使用字典或翻譯機。Watch your time and have fun! Total: 105 points
Part One: 25 Multiple choice questions. [By multiple choice in an English-speaking academic environment, we mean that you must choose the most appropriate one from 4 alternatives. 依慣例，答錯不倒扣！] 75 points
1. An economic agent, called A, has 10 hours to be spent on producing goods X and Y under linear (or fixed rate) technologies specified as follows. Spending a hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦10, on the production of X can bring him 2a units of X (or expressed by x = 2a); spending a hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦10, on producing Y can yield a units of Y (i.e., y = a). A’s production possibility frontier (or PPF for short) is
(A) (a/2)x + ay = 10;
(B) x + 2y = 20;
(C) x + 2y = 10;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: B. [In light of linear (or fixed rate) technologies, since a hours can produce 2a units of X, 1 unit of X requires (labor in the amount of) 0.5 hour. Similarly,a hours can produce a units of Y, implying that 1 unit of Y requires (labor in the amount of) 1 hour. Hence, 0.5x + y = 10.]

2. [continued from question 1] Find the correct statement.
(A) The slope of A’s PPF is -2;
(B) The horizontal intercept of A’s PPF is 10;
(C) The vertical intercept of A’s PPF is 20;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: D. [From x + 2y = 20 we see that its slope is -0.5, its horizontal intercept is 20; its vertical intercept is 10.]

3. [continued from question 1] Since a/2 units of X are trade-off for a units of Y, we shall say that the opportunity cost of producing
(A) 1 unit of Y is 2 units of X;
(B) 1 unit of Y is 0.5;
(C) 1 unit of X is 0.5;
(D) 1 unit of X is 2 units of Y.
Ans: A. [It follows from 2a : a = 2 : 1 in light of that 2aunits of X are trade-off for a units of Y (due to the same time spent).]

4. [continued from question 1] We know that
(A) A has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(B) A has the absolute advantage in producing Y;
(C) A has the comparative advantage in producing Y;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: D. [Although one unit of good X costs A 0.5 hour; one unit of good Y costs A 1
Hour, we cannot say that A has the absolute advantage in producing good X. Recall
definitions of absolute advantage and comparative advantage given in Lecture 3.]

5. [continued from question 2] Suppose that A is the only producer in the economy which is entirely isolated from the rest of the world. The (domestic) relative price of good X (in terms of good Y) is
(A) 1;
(B) 2;
(C) 0.5;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: C. [Since 2aunits of X are trade-off for a units of Y, the relative price of good X is a/(2a) = 0.5.]

6. An economic agent, called B, has 20 hours to be spent on producing goods X and Y under linear (or fixed rate) technologies specified as follows. Spending a hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦20, on the production of X can bring him a/2 units of X; spending a hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦20, on producing Y can yield a/2 units of Y. B’s PPF is
(A) x + y = 10;
(B) x + y = 20;
(C) x + 2y = 20;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: A. [In light of linear (or fixed rate) technologies, since a hours can produce a/2 units of X, 1 unit of X requires (labor in the amount of) 2 hours. Likewise,a/2 hours can produce a units of Y, implying that 1 unit of Y requires (labor in the amount of) 2 hour. Hence, 2x + 2y = 20 or x + y = 10.]

7. [continued from question 6]
(A) The opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of Y is 2 units of X;
(B) The opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of Y is 0.5 unit of X;
(C) The opportunity cost of producing 2 units of Y is 2 units of X;
(D) None of the above is true.
Ans: C. [1 : 1 = 2 : 2]

8. [continued from questions 1 and 6] Regarding A and B,
(A) A has the absolute advantage in producing good X only;
(B) A has the absolute advantage in producing good Y only;
(C) B has the absolute advantage in producing both goods;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: D. [For x = 1, A needs to spend 0.5 hour; B needs to spend 2 hours. For y = 1, A needs to spend 1 hour; B needs to spend 2 hours. Hence, A has the absolute advantage in producing both goods X and Y.]

9. [continued from questions 1 and 6] Regarding A and B,
(A) Neither has the comparative advantage in producing X;
(B) A has the comparative advantage in producing X;
(C) B has the comparative advantage in producing X;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: B. [For A, the opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of X is 0.5 unit of Y. For B,
the opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of X is 1 unit of Y. Hence, A has the comparative advantage in producing X. Also, B has the comparative advantage in producing Y. Intuition? A’s PPF is flatter than B’s PPF.]

10. [continued from question 9] Suppose that both agree to specialize and trade. What might be the relative price of good X (with respect to good Y) in trading?
(A) 1/3;
(B) 1/2;
(C) 2/3;
(D) 1.
Ans: C. [Let A produce x = 20 and y = 0; let B produce y = 10 and x = 0. When the trade takes places, the relative price of good X will be somewhere between 0.5 and 1.]

11. [continued from questions 5 and 10] We see the intuition as follows. If the home country exports bananas to another country that produces no banana, then the relative price of banana at trade will be
(A) higher than the domestic relative price of banana (with no trade);
(B) lower than the domestic relative price of banana (with no trade);
(C) the same as the domestic relative price of banana (with no trade);
(D) different in both countries.
Ans: A. [Think about the change from 1/2 to 2/3.]

12. 期初，我徵求課堂義工兩位。有人說：「為什麼不讓同學輪值呢？同學在中小學階段，應該已經習慣如此。」以經濟學思維，讓同學輪值，與下列何者相似？
(A) 發放消費券；
(B) 發放老人年金；
(C) 不去監理所驗車；
(D) 生輔組的廣播。
Ans: D. [Efficiency and reducing externalities are the key issues.]

13. Anna Smith 堅持約會時 “Go Dutch.” Which of the following is consistent?
(A) She is trying to reduce sunk costs;
(B) She is trying to get more dates;
(C) She is trying to reduce the opportunity costs of dating;
(D) She is testing to see whether boys are sincere.
Ans: B. [Trivial]

14. Becky Dow 對這門課考前準備不足，既沒閱讀課本，也忘記帶至考場。She chose to turn in exam paper earlier so as to work on Tuesday’s exam. The key explanation is related to
(A) externalities;
(B) incentives;
(C) sunk costs;
(D)比例原則。
Ans: C. [Obvious]

15. 國內大學難以禁止同學穿著拖鞋進入校園，其原因與下列何者較無關？
(A) cost-benefit principle;
(B) incentive principle;
(C) enforcement is costly;
(D) Trade can make everyone better off.
Ans: D. [Trivial]

16. None of the following four job applicants could answer some question during interview. Which applicant deserves a better chance of being hired?
(A) 表示知道答案，但是不確定是不是面試官要的；
(B) 表示曾經知道答案，但是畢業就還給老師了；
(C) 表示不知道答案，因為老師沒教過；
(D) 表示不知道答案，請求跳至下一題。
Ans: D. [Trivial]

17. April Woo spent 3000 dollars on going to 85oC café last year just to attract a part-time worker’s attention. June Wang spent 500 dollars last month on going to a video store for similar reason. In the end, both April and June were disappointed. 如果單純由金錢支出來看，April 似乎比 June 聰明一些。其理由與下列何者較相關？
(A) Decision Pitfall (陷阱) 1 in Lecture 1;
(B) Decision Pitfall (陷阱) 2 in Lecture 1;
(C)學姐拾金要求報酬之新聞；
(D)新生盃球賽為何不排在週末。
Ans: A. [比例原則]

18. The textbook mentions an example of outsourcing in Chinese.
(A) It is about sending out spam mails;
(B) It is about playing computer game;
(C) It shows that the comparative advantage principle might fail;
(D) It demonstrates outsourcing differs from international trade.
Ans: B. [See p.59, text]

19. Recall questions 1 and 6. 依據教科書的介紹方式，如果沒有貿易，則
(A) A will produce 10 units of X;
(B) A will produce 20 units of X;
(C) A will produce 10 units of Y;
(D) B will produce 10 units of Y.
Ans: A. [See Figure 1 on p.51, text]

20. [continued from question 19] The reason for doing that is to better illustrate
(A) fairness;
(B) efficiency;
(C) simplicity in calculation;
(D) gains from trade.
Ans: D. [Notice the move in the upper-right (or NE) direction.]

21.王姓學長曾經連續兩年出現在英語初戀營的相見歡活動，告訴新生：「經濟學不用買課本啦」。This reminds us of
(A) p.37, text;
(B) Figure A-6 on p.47, text;
(C) Figure 2, on p.26, text;
(D) p.11, text.
Ans: B. [Key: omitted variable.]

*22. 假設學校將全班期末平均成績為50分的所有課程，查出教學評量並求出平均值。接著，將全班期末平均成績為51分的所有課程，查出教學評量並求出平均值。… 最後，將全班期末平均成績為99分的所有課程，查出教學評量並求出平均值。以x軸記錄全班期末平均成績；以y軸記錄對應的教學評量平均值。這樣得到的50個點，概括連線後，極可能不是「正斜率」走向。
(A) This highlights reverse causality;
(B) This suggests that tough grading is not the reason for getting poor rating in teaching evaluations;
(C) This reminds us of the danger of having missing variables;
(D) This shows why we need calculus.
Ans: C. [Midterm exam score is the missing variable.]

23. There are three projects, a, b, and c. Denote by B(i) the benefit of project i; C(i) the cost of project i, where i = a, b, and c. Assume B(a) = 100, B(b) = 100, B(c) = 80, C(a) = 80, C(b) = 90, and C(c) = 60.
(A) This shows that we shall choose the project with the lowest opportunity cost;
(B) The opportunity cost of choosing a exceeds the opportunity cost of choosing b;
(C) The opportunity cost of choosing b exceeds the opportunity cost of choosing c;
(D) According to text, three projects all have opportunity costs as 100.
Ans: D. [The opportunity cost of choosing any project is 20. The net benefit of choosing project a is 20; the net benefit of choosing project b is 10; the net benefit of choosing project c is 20.]

24. Linda was desperately attracted to Frank while she did not feel the same way toward George. George loved Linda a lot while Frank did not love Linda that much. Finally, Linda chose George and left Frank. Suppose that Linda’s decision is consistent with “maximizing net benefit” as well as “minimizing opportunity costs.” Using the notations introduced in question 23, we’d better assume:
(A) B(F) = 30, B(G) = 18, C(F) = 22, C(G) = 8;
(B) B(F) = 30, B(G) = 20, C(F) = 20, C(G) = 10;
(C) B(F) = 30, B(G) = 18, C(F) = 22, C(G) = 10;
(D) B(F) = 30, B(G) = 28, C(F) = 20, C(G) = 18.
Ans: A.

25. Suppose that producing 30 units of good X and 20 units of good Y is known to be inefficient for some economy. This economy’s PPF might be
(A) x + 4y = 110;
(B) x + 3y = 80;
(C) 3x + y = 100;
(D) 2x + 3y = 130.
Ans: D. [The point (30, 20) must sit below the PPF. Notice 2(30) + 3(20) = 120 < 130.]



Part Two: Analytical questions. [注意字體工整、邏輯順暢與不要出現錯別字或注音(與火星文)！如果字跡難以辨認，視同未答。畫蛇添足、答非所問、不知所云、自曝其短，將不利得分。] 30 points
26. For (i) and (ii), answer true or false. Must briefly justify your answer.
(i) If country A has the absolute advantage of producing good X (over country B), then the horizontal intercept of country A’s PPF must be greater than the horizontal intercept of country B’s PPF.
(ii) If the slope of country A’s PPF is greater than the slope of country B’s PPF, then A must have the comparative advantage of producing good X.
Ans:
(i) false! See question 8. Note that A has the absolute advantage in producing Y, yet the vertical intercept of x + 2y = 20 is the same as the vertical intercept of x + y = 10. If we modify the story by interchanging X and Y in questions 1 and 6, we will get 2x + y = 20 and x + y = 10.
(ii) true! See the connection between the slope of PPF and the opportunity cost.

27. Think like an economist! “Grade inflation” has received lots of attention in U.S.A. Scholars including economists argued that emphasis on teaching evaluations eventually pressured professors to give easy grades, causing grade inflation. However and with regret, this issue has not got enough attention in Taiwan.
(i) What will you do if you are the university president?
(ii) What will you do if you are a professor who has been very serious in teaching and grading?
Ans:
(i) It is well known that individual student’s grade should be kept confidential. Nevertheless, the average grade of any course taught by any faculty member can be made public! The president can require information such as average midterm exam score and average final grade be open to students, faculty members, and even parents. For years, in many universities, core courses at lower levels are curved in the sense that professors are asked to keep the average grade within some range. [Google the term grade inflation for more on this issue.]
(ii) Knowing that single-handedly changing the world is truly impossible, the professor must think carefully so as to avoid the so-called adverse selection problem. Keep up with the Jones! Do not be too tough on students at large even if the majority seems to deserve a failing grade; teach elective courses rather than required courses; try to reduce the number of students in elective courses (by inducing students to follow the self-selection pattern); incorporate this issue to exams as I am doing now, ….

28. 扼要寫出一個日常生活情境。再提出一項措施或行動，足以提升both efficiency and equity。 Warning: 取材僅限於日常生活情境
Ans: skipped.

(撰寫試題無著作權；歡迎全貌下載流傳)

Performance:
60 students
Adjusting rule: Max{(unadjusted score + 15)(1.4), 40}
Average: 64.0
Highest-lowest: 91-40
期中預警人數：8

升格大學一點也不難 -- just ask for it! Ask ANYONE!

幾年前，我被一位大一班代嚇到。不是他(她)跆拳道上段，而是在開學前，跑來問我教科書資訊。不過，也只有這一次。(我在美國求學與教書時，開學前大家都是自行去校園書店買書。台灣學生真的比較強吧！)

這學期因為中秋放假與新生導航，兩門大一必修課，要在第二週才正式上課。一直不見任何關於教科書的提問。系辦公室其實已經有教材資訊，新生不常去系辦公室，可以理解。我想，這屆新生真強，似乎這學期會全班 all pass. 也許，被我形容為『白目、缺乏學術常識』的某些校外專家，其實是英明有水晶球的，因為新生根本不需要經濟學原理與微積分！

So I sent an open message via e-learning. I wrote: "Since no student has ever come to us and asked what the textbook is and how to obtain the text. Great class! Congratulations to all involved."

I got the following response:

"sorry teacher!!!!!!!!
我們不知道要怎麼問
想說等上課了老師應該會說
我有問學長姐關於買書的問題
學長姐說上課老師就會說了
所以就沒去問老師了!!!!!!!!"

學長姐說了算？真的滿容易耶！所以，學校想升格，只要校長問一問別的校長，一句　ok 我們就坐著等好消息嗎？大家轉寄分享此則好消息吧。　

How gossip is conceived and what makes the world full of cheap talk

Student A: 請問今天有任何刁難的題目嗎? 有聽學妹說有人從五樓坐電梯下來在哭....
Professor B: 刁難? I doubt. 我家孔雀魚死了一隻，妳能質疑馬總統：為何台灣不能養孔雀魚嗎？
Student A: 聽不懂... !? 我理解能力有點差!
Professor B: I see. Let me post this mini series on FB. As time goes by, at least some readers will comprehend.

原因？
是文化嗎？是追求浪漫？
祖父挾菜給孫女，接著說：是不是爺爺挾的菜，特別香啊？！
我們成長的環境，罕見有人敢說：香與不香，與挾菜人應該無關。爺爺挾菜，是愛心表現，也可能沾到爺爺的唾液，就這樣喲。

後續發展報告：

Student A: 我只是很直接，想知道有什麼樣刁難的題目，想多學習。Sorry.

Professor B: What I care about is the logical reasoning.
1. When C sees the post made by A, C might wonder who that 學妹 was and whether A was telling the truth (and whether that 學妹 was telling the truth, ...).
2. 「刁鑽」是否是哭泣的充分條件？還是必要條件？
3. 試想：『xx學校面試 考生淚灑電梯』如果成為某白目報紙標題，對認真的師生與優秀考生，傷害有多大！

幼稚園大學 龍應台 (網路文章轉載 如有侵權 敬請賜告)

這是一班大三的學生：聰慧、用功、循規蹈矩，標準國立大學的好學生。
看完期末考卷，批完論文報告，我把總成績寄出，等著學生來找我：零分或是一百分，他們總得看著卷子的眉批，與我印證討論過之後，才能知道為什麼得了一百分或零分。假期過去了，新學期開始了，學期又結束了。
學生來找我聊天、吃消夜、談功課；就是沒有一個人問起成績的事。有一個成績應該很好的學生，因為論文的注腳寫得零亂散漫，我特意大幅度地降低了他的分數，希望他來質疑時告訴他一個教訓：作研究，注腳與正文一樣重要。
但是他也沒有來。等了半年之後，我忍不住了：“你們為什麼不跟教授討論成績？”學生面面相覷，很驚訝我問了這樣一個問題。
“我們怎麼敢呢？教授會很生氣，認為我們懷疑他的判斷力，不尊重他的權威。去討論、詢問，或爭執成績，等於是跟教授挑戰，我們怎麼敢？”那麼，假設教授打了個盹，加錯了分數呢？或是一個不小心，張冠李戴呢？或者，一個遊戲人間的老師真的用電扇吹考卷來決定成績呢？
逐漸的，我發覺在台灣當教授，真的可以“get away with murder”，可以做出極端荒唐過分的事而不致遭到學生的反抗，因為學生被灌輸了二十年“尊師重道”的觀念；他不敢。
有一天，一個淚眼汪汪的女學生半路上攔住了我的車子：“有個同學扭傷了腳踝，你能不能送我們下山搭車回台北？我攔了三輛路人的車，他們都不肯幫忙！”
好吧！於是淚眼汪汪的女學生扶來了另一個淚眼汪汪的人，一跛一跛的，進了我的車。下山只有幾分鐘的車程，可是車後兩個人拼命掉眼淚、吸鼻涕。受傷的哭，因為腳痛，想媽媽；沒受傷的也哭，因為她不知道如何處理這個情況。事實上，這個驚天動地的“情況”只需要兩通電話：第一通打給校醫，第二通打給計程車行，如此而已。
我很驚異地看著這兩個女生哭成一團。她們今年廿歲，正在接受高等的大學教育。她們獨立處事的能力，還不到五歲。
開始的時候，課堂上問學生問題得不到回音，我以為是學生聽力不夠，於是我把英語慢下來，一個字一個字說，再問，還是一堵死墻；於是改用國語，再問。我發覺，語言的問題其次，思想的貧乏才是癥結所在。
學生很用功。指定的小說或劇本上課前多半很盡責地讀完。他能把故事的情節大綱說得一清二楚，可是，當我開始問“為什麼”的時候，他就瞠目以對——不知道，沒想過。
他可以讀十篇愛倫坡的謀殺小說，每一篇都讀情，但不能夠綜觀十篇整理出一個連貫的脈絡來。他可以了解蘇格拉底為什麼拒絕逃獄，也明白梭羅為什麼拒絕出獄，但這兩個事件之間有怎樣的關係；他不知道。他可以說出詩人艾略特對藝術獨創與模倣的理論，但是要他對王三慶的倣畫事件發表意見——他不知道，他沒有意見，他沒學過，老師沒教過，課本裏沒有。
我愛惜我的學生；像努力迎取陽光的黃色向日葵，他們聰慧、純潔、奮發，對老師尤其一片真情。但是，他們也是典型的中國學生：缺乏獨立自主的個性，盲目地服從權威，更嚴重的，他們沒有——完全沒有——獨立思考的能力。
錯在學生嗎？
當然不是。學生是一坯混沌的黏土，在教育者的手中搓揉成型。從小學到大專聯考這個漫長過程中的種種問題，暫且不談，讓我們看看這些“不敢”、“淚眼汪汪”、“沒有意見”的大學生正在接受什麼樣的高等教育。廿歲的人表現出五歲的心智，往往是因為辦教育的人對學生採取一種“抱著走”的育嬰方式。常常會聽到一些大學校長說，“我把學生當自己的兒女看待”，一派慈祥。他也真做得像個嚴父慈母：規定學生不許穿拖鞋在校內行走，上課不許遲到，周會時要正襟危坐，睡眠要足八小時，熄燈前要洗澡如廁，清晨六點必須起床作操，講話時不許口含食物，夏天不可穿短褲上課，看電影有害學業，看電視有傷眼睛，吃飯之前要洗手，等等等。
我一直以為大學校長是高瞻遠矚，指導學術與教育大方向的決策人，而不是管饅頭稀飯的保姆，但這也暫且不提。這一類型的教育者的用心，毋庸置疑，當然是善意的，問題是，我們論“事”的時候，用心如何根本不重要，重要的是實際的後果， 而教育的後果何其嚴重！ 這種喂哺式、育嬰式的大學教育剛好吻合心理學家Levy早在一九四三年給所謂“過度保護”（Overprotection）所作的詮釋：第一，給予過多的接觸——“有任何問題，隨時來找我” ；第二，禁止他獨立自主——“你不許……”；第三，將他“嬰兒化”——“乖，早睡早起”；第四，把自己的價值取向加諸其身——“你聽我的……”。在這種過度呵護的幼稚教育下成長的大學生，遇事時，除了“淚眼汪汪”之外又能做什麼呢？
教育者或許會說：這些學生如果進大學以前，就已經學好自治自律的話，我就不必要如此提之攜之，喂之哺之；就是因為基礎教育沒教好，所以我辦大學的人不得不教。雖然是亡羊補牢，總比不教好。
聽起來有理。其實是個因噎廢食的邏輯。這個學生之所以在小、中學十二年間沒有學會自治自律， 就是因為他們一直接受喂哺式的輔導， 那麼大學來繼續進行“育嬰”，這豈不是一個沒完沒了的惡性迴圈？把學生口裏的奶嘴拿掉，我們總要有個起點；大學不做，更待何時？再說，我們對大學教育的期許是什麼？教出一個言聽計從、中規中矩、不穿拖鞋短褲的學生，和教出一個自己會看情況、作決定、下判斷的學生——究竟哪一個比較重要？為了塑造出“聽話”、“規矩”的青年，而犧牲了他自主自決、自治自律的能力——這是我們大學教育的目的嗎？
在生活上，教育者採取懷裏“抱著走”的方式；在課業上，許多教書的人就有用鞭子“趕著走”的態度。就上課點名這件小事來說。以學生出席與否作為評分標準的老師很多，他們的論點是：學生都有惰性，今天我逼你讀書，日後你會感謝我。
這個說法也很動人，卻毫不合理。首先，我們不應該忘記，開一門課程最根本、最重要的目的在傳授知識，而不在鈴響與鈴響之間清數“少了幾頭牛”。照邏輯來說，如果一個學生不聽課就已經具有那門課所要傳授的知識，並且能夠以考試或其他方式證明他的程度，那麼他就沒有必要為了一個人頭點名的成規而來報到。歸根究底，這個“成規”當初之所以存在，只是為了幫助學生獲取這一門知識——讓我們在同一時刻同一地點去聽同一個人有系統的講——但是，一個學生，不論原因為何，已經擁有那個知識，那麼要他來作充數的形式就是舍本逐末，也是為師者見林不見樹的錯誤。
反過來說，一個學生沒有那門知識卻一再缺課，教授當然要淘汰他，但淘汰的理由應該是：你沒有得到知識；而不是：你點名未到。上課出席率與知識吸取量並沒有因果或正比的關係。
為師者“嚴”，我絕對贊同；愈嚴愈好。但是那份“嚴”與“逼”必須在實質的知識上，不在僵化的形式上。換句話說，教授可以用比較深奧的教材，出比較靈活的考題，指定比較繁重的作業，來逼使學生努力。但他如果尊重學生是一個有自主判斷能力的成人。他就沒有理由拿著鞭子把學生抓到教室裏來；充其量，作老師的只能嚴肅地說：上不上課在你，努力不努力也在你；你要學會如何為自己的行為擔負後果。從小學到高中，我們的學生已經在“鞭策”之下被動了十二年，如果最後的大學四年他們也在鞭子下長大——他們會長大嗎？畢了業之後又由誰來執鞭呢？
這種“趕著走”的鞭策教育貽害極深。學生之所以不能“舉一隅而以三隅反”，固然是因為在“抱著走”、“趕著走”的過程中從來沒有學過如何去思考，有一個實質上的困難使他即使想開始也不可能。
信仰鞭策教育的人不相信學生有自動好學的可能。於是設置了七七八八的課目，塞滿學生的時間。大一的學生，譬如說，一星期就有三十多個小時的課。大四的課少了，有些系就強迫學生修額外的學分，作為防範怠惰的措施。可是我面臨一個巨大的難題。文學是思想；每一小時的課，學生除了必須作兩小時的課前預讀之外，還得加上三小時課後的咀嚼與消化，否則，我付出的那一小時等於零。文學，也不是象牙塔裏的白日夢；學生必須將那一小時中所聽到的觀念帶到教室外面、校園外面，與廣大的宇宙和紛擾的現實世界銜接起來。否則，這個新的觀念也等於零。
這些，都需要時間與空間，可是學生辦不到。他們的課程安排得滿滿的，像媒婆趕喜酒一樣，一場接一場。他們的腦子像一幅潑了大紅大紫、沒有一寸留白的畫。如果怕學生怠情，我們應該增加學分時數強迫學生把“身體”放在教室裏呢，還是應該加深加重課程的內涵使學生不得不把整個“心”都投入？這是不是又牽涉到一個本末的問題？我們如果不給學生時間與空間去思考，我們又怎麼能教他們如何思考呢？在國外教書的那許多年，我踏出教室時常有生機盎然的感覺，因為在與學生激烈的反應與挑戰中，我也得到新的成長。在這裡，走出教室我常有被掏空的感覺，被針刺破了的氣球一般。學生像個無底的撲滿，把錢投進去、投進去、卻沒有什麼驚奇會跳出來，使我覺得富有。
說學生缺乏自治自律的精神，說他們沒有獨立思考的能力，我其實還沒有碰觸一個更基本的先決問題：我們的教育政策究竟希不希望教出獨立自主的學生來？答案若是否定的，這篇文章便毫無意義，可以燒掉。我是在假定我們的社會有意造就獨立自主的下一代的大前提之下寫這篇檢討。可是，如果這個假定的大前提是對的，為什麼我們在思想的訓練上，還是採取“騎著走”的方式？一方面，學生懦弱畏縮，成績有了失誤，不敢去找老師求證或討論。教授解錯了題目，不敢指出錯誤，大家混混過去。對課程安排不滿，不敢提出異議。不願意被強迫住宿，卻又不敢到訓導處去陳情。私底下批評無能的老師、社團的限制、課外活動的規則，或宿舍管理方式，可是又不敢光明正大地對當事機構表達意見。偶爾有人把批評寫成文章，要在校刊上發表——“不必試，會被壓下來！”學生很肯定地說，“反正沒有用，我畢了業就到美國去！”
另一方面，作老師的繼續努力強調“尊師重道”的傳統美德，連學生少鞠一個躬都當作對五千年中華文化與民族的背叛。“尊師重道”這四個字在歷史上的意義我不去談，在現代講究分工與專業的社會裏，卻很有商榷的餘地。“重道”毋庸置疑；對知識的肯定與尊重是教育之所以成為制度的基礎。但是“尊師”，如果指凡“師”必“尊”——只因為這個人在這個位子——那就是鼓勵盲目地服從權威。到處都有誤人子弟的師，有不學無術的師，更有招搖撞騙的師；我們有沒有權利要求學生“尊”無“道”的“師”？學生怯懦畏縮，是他們缺乏勇氣，還是我們迷信自己的權威，又缺乏自信，不敢給他們挑戰的機會？
我們若真心想培養出有能力“慎思、明辨、篤行”的下一代，為什麼又懼怕他因為“慎思、明辨”而對我們的權威造成威脅？台灣的大學在師資與設備上，比我自己的學生時代要進步得很多很多。中國學生的聰慧、誠懇，與一心想討好老師的認真努力，常常深刻地感動我。而學生資質愈好，這種幼稚化的大學教育就愈令我焦急難過。辦教育的人，或許本著善意與愛心，仍舊習慣地、固執地，把大學生當“自己的兒女”看待，假定他們是被動的、怠惰的、 依賴的。 這個假定或許沒錯，可是教育者應對的方式，不是毅然決然地“斷奶”，而是繼續地呵護與控制，造成一種可怕的惡性迴圈。令我憂心不已的是．這些“不敢”、“淚眼汪汪”、“沒有意見”、“不知道”的大學生，出了學校之後，會成為什麼樣的公民？什麼樣的社會中堅？他能明辨是非嗎？他敢生氣嗎？他會為自己爭取權利嗎？他知道什麼叫社會良知、道德勇氣嗎？恐怕答案全是否定的。
如果我們把眼光放遠，真心要把台灣治好，我們需要能思考、能判斷、有勇氣良知的公民；在位在權的人必須張開手臂來接受刺激與挑戰。如果我們真心要把教育治好，為這個民族培養出能思考、能判斷、有勇氣良知的下一代，那麼辦教育的、教書的，就不能迷信自己的權威；他也要禁得起來自學生的刺激與挑戰。把我們的大學生當“成人”看吧！給他們一個機會，不要牽著他的手。

Added by jsw: 每年都會有一類學生，成績接近中下。當他們不想做某件事，會很技巧地放話：「怎麼辦 ... 老師一定會生氣的，因為我沒有去執行那件事。我一定會被當掉！」然後一群攪局者會接手，吵吵鬧鬧，不知不覺地，學期結束了。他們終究沒執行那件事，不過大家也淡忘此事，更沒人有興趣認真分析究竟該不該執行。至於分數，很多人及格、也有人不及格。及格的人也許會嗆聲：「就知道老師不敢惹我這號實力派人物。」不及格的人也許會說：「我早就料到老師會整我。」老師可能 OS:「話... 都是你們在說！」 如果我是校長，會將這小插曲，與每月薪水通知，一併發送，附加一句： It all comes with your job. God speed.

應該可以組團上節目 『大學生了沒』

我有一個小惡夢 ....

導師請班代轉達：簡述可以被記嘉獎的理由，意者從速

班代公告：有人需要記佳獎嗎? (可以拉高操性分數)　　
jsw註：嘉獎被寫成佳獎，別有意境。操行硬是要寫成操性，因為「性」真的氾濫嗎？

然後一些人搶著說：我要！
…
jsw註：誰敢說我們的學生都沒反應？誰敢說這個社會內需不足？

導師有些無奈，低調走莊子路線告訴班代：我請S轉達: 『誰有一千張千元鈔票，與我換一萬張百元鈔票？ 』 結果 S 宣佈：『誰要一萬張百元鈔票？ 』一堆人搶著說「要」。 上帝：信我者得永生。無數人回應：我要永生。相對少數人回應：我信祢。

愈戰愈勇的班代重新公告：有人需要記佳獎嗎? (可以拉高操性分數)　條件: 簡述可以被記嘉獎的理由，意者從速。
　
熱心的班代持續(為同學)問道：如果理由是，請假請太多，操性成績太低，可以報名嗎?平常學業成績有在進步，想要申請校外獎學金， 需要較高的操性成績，這樣子呢?
jsw註：「性」還真的一直戰勝「行」。

導師回應：假設一位長相愛國男向美女求婚，並說： Have my baby. Only with you I can have a beautiful baby.　How would you think of the outcome?
這回，班代終於懂了。
jsw註：我曾經認識一人，竟然說，美女會答應長相愛國男的求婚，只要我不是那位美女就好。

Postscript:
善用部落格(blog)，是可以默默觀察人的行為。一位已經被我刪除的未曾謀面女網友，時而夜晚發佈狀態：「好餓喲」。不到十分鐘，會有至少十幾則回文，諸如「妳想吃什麼？」；「一起加油，妳一定可以的」 ；「我也好餓喲」；「妳那麼正，不必節食啊」；「來台北，我請妳吃宵夜」.... 也有一些美食情報分享或回味。我猜測，她還是在飢餓中，或是已經悄悄吃起泡麵。不久，殺出一位有些不解風情的程咬金，寫道：「Just call your BF!」
Two sentences come to mind.
1. A cheap question very likely invites cheap answers.
2. 物以類聚

最近豔陽高照，井底之蛙，應該可由井口，看到完整圓形的天空。就有國際觀嗎？

又到期末，出考卷與打成績，一直是戒慎恐懼的大事。專業，不是靠一紙文憑、聘書來認定的。
同學們，是否也有同樣心態呢？我的悲觀，來源很多。剛出爐的99評鑑報告，有些論點，就讓我啼笑皆非。

『會計學與經濟學，各有6學分，皆是入學考試考科，對高職商科同學來說，似乎重複太多 ...』
(OS: 我實地去高職為實習教師課堂訪視過，也參加教育部委託雲科大辦理對考試科目的垂直整合會議。委員究竟是否知道高職是如何教會計與經貿概論嗎？高中、高職生都有英文、國文、體育與勞動教育，那麼，在大學是不是也可以免掉？ )

『財務管理列為必修，而國際財管則是選修，但國際行銷、國際人資卻都是必修。建議考慮將策略管理列為必修，並且考慮將國際財管取代財管為必修。』
(OS: 所以，經濟學應被國際經濟學取代，會計學應被國際會計學取代，商事法應被國際商事法取代，統計學應被國際統計學取代。最好... 體育應被國際體育取代。我一直幻想，辦個策略管理與應用賽局 PK(國際)賽，決定這兩門課的直線前後順序。當然賽後，都得分別改名為國際策略管理與國際應用賽局。曾經有一笑話，張三如果改名為張國際，應該會在入學管道上，贏在起跑點！)

後記：因為無法睡到自然醒，索性熬夜熬到自然睡。所以，睡前習慣躺著看電視。有幾次轉到港片台，看到曾經小小著迷的楊思敏，就多看一會兒。有一部常常播放的香港三級片，一個壞胚，竟然取名為陳經濟。以前覺得奇怪，如今總算找到一個命名理由。

When do we have 90% (9 out of ten) equal 100% (the sure thing)? A story to be continued. 我朋友的故事

教授A to 學生B: 『你的期中考成績在班上算是墊底。』
學生B to 教授A: 『這樣還有救嗎？』
教授A: 『讓我想想 …… 就我幾十年經驗，像你這類情況，大概十人裡面，只有一位期末會過關。』
……
學生B to 教務處人員:『我老師一定會當我！我要報名暑修。』
教務處人員驚訝:『學期才過半不久，怎麼就知道學期成績呢？』
暑修報名遭拒絕。
……
教授A to 學生B: 『你的誇飾用語，其實有些像搬巨石砸自己的腳。我很難過，你修過另外一門關於談判溝通的課，卻仍沒注意用詞。』
學生B to 教授A: 『不是我用誇張用語，是你要我先報，而且你説歷屆會過的10個只有一個，我當然要報。錢都拿出來了又不能報？！』
教授A: 『When do we have 90% (9 out of ten) equal 100% (the sure thing)? I shall say no more. Please do save a copy of all these correspondences and review them when you become a parent or even a teacher (or staff) at some university many years from now.』
…….
教務處人員 to 教授A :『您好意提醒同學暑修這一補救途徑，可是學生告訴我，他一定會被當。現在就讓學生報名暑修，可能(在他的認知裡)等於宣告他一定會被當。所有學校的期末教學評量，都是在學生不知道期末成績時填寫。我們不讓他報名，既給他一線希望、鼓勵用功，也可能避免他因氣憤而給您不好的評量。』

教授A to 教務處人員:『我遺憾，有人執意認為90%與100%相同。也好奇，我買防癌險，就表示我預料必得癌症嗎？這真的是顛覆傳統保險、保險經濟學的新理論！ 當我發下期中考卷的那一刻，我很清楚，期中考成績很不理想的同學裡，應該有一部份人(注意：我沒有估算比例)，幾週後會給我很差的評量。我只是在盡本份。As people often said, if you cannot stand heat, stay away from the kitchen. 如果每位老師都怕這種報復性評量，就選擇給學生還可接受的期中考分數，這就是失責、沒有擔當。人人如此，就榮獲學店之名。』

這類故事，其實並不新鮮，你我都可能出現在劇本裡。只是很敏感、也令人沮喪。暑假我會寫成較完整的小品文，看看能否見諸於報紙，就教於社會大眾。

How a little bit knowledge in strategic thinking (or game theory) can help you with your job

在暑修課程，舉凡授課大綱之上傳、全面點名、登錄成績等，一切都比照正常學期(regular semesters)辦理。對學生的請假，限制還更嚴。我一直納悶：為何暑修課程沒有實施期末教學意見調查？
請教學校相關同仁，客氣地回應幾點：
(A)好像一直沒人提出這一問題
(B)如果兼任老師授課後，得到低於3.5(out of 5)的評量分數，依辦法將不能續聘
(C)其實學校暑修課程總量不多

我提醒同仁，經濟學者早就提出重覆賽局 (repeated games)與非同步決策(sequential-move decision-making)，也用在大學教育上。例如：張三修我的課，期中考得38分，我依規定給予期中預警。期末考前，張三(甚至我自己)猜測張三通過的機率應該在30%以下。當學校要求張三填寫對教師之教學滿意度(不記名問卷)調查時，張三很有可能給予極負面評量。教師出題與打成績時，不會知道自己的評量。有國外期刊論文發現，教師提高期中考成績x%，該教師教學滿意度分數就會上升y%。我自己默默實驗幾年，大致與此發現吻合。同仁卻一直告訴我，教學滿意度分數與該課程全班學期成績，沒有相關性。這兩者，等同於simultaneous move (同步)。可見，他們沒有認真思考sequential move的影響。
也聽幾位老師說過，學年課程，似乎以在第二學期結束前，才實施教學評量為宜。因為有人擔心，如果教師看到第一學期不好的評量，在第二學期就會更嚴苛給分。其實，這種推理，已經融入sequential move的策略思考。我的授課，經常是下學期平均分數，高於上學期平均分數，究竟是同學自我調適成功？變得較用功、更聰明？還是我有感於『瓜田李下』成語啟示，自己避嫌？永遠沒有答案。
回到暑修議題。假設張三修我的課未過關，隨班重修時，有可能給予不好的教學評量。如果我去年『當』(failed)15位同學，今年都隨(低年級)班重修，有可能把我這一次的教學評量重創。如果我設法讓他們只能暑修，他們將無法給我任何教學評量。所以，對這類教師而言，現行制度正提供一個壓倒性策略(dominant or dominating strategy)！反之，如果暑修同學透過小班教學與前車之鑑，在暑修過程中，對該教師的觀感，大幅度改變，此一佳音，學校與教師將不得而知。緣此，逆選擇(adverse selection)現象，也可能出現。

說了很多，聽進去有多少？我不願估算。
Some years ago, I wrote a short entry entitled “Wenzao is Unique.” That concludes this blog article.

模糊的藝術

有一間研究所，最近發函給我，希望我能對導師班學生，來些招生宣傳。經過認真思考，我決定直接刪除那封電郵。理由？我的學生常懷困惑，勢必無法欣賞、接受『模糊之美』。就算是無福消受吧。

『模糊之美』，緣起是什麼呢？一年前，這間研究所，幾乎是在最後一刻，安排我去上一門選修課，沒有選課輔導，即將因人數不足倒班。我自己上陣宣傳，終於順利開班。當時心想，邀我開課，想必詳讀過我的履歷表，認同我的專業，所以誠懇冒昧建言，希望能導正課程名稱，爾後不要讓人看笑話。結果石沉大海，也是意料之中。最近一通電話，告訴我下學期又排我教授此課，我決定不欣然接受，也不婉拒。『模糊』是也。沒幾天，又被告知，一切一切都未定案。WOW! Amazing. 又是『模糊』。心想，如果那天我『明確』接受或拒絕，豈不是傻瓜？

只是好奇，其他事務，也是如此模糊嗎？學生入學後的權利義務，也會模糊處理嗎？有沒有可能『買一送一』學費大優惠？補貼到美國百名以內名校交換學習呢？讀者可能會認為我是『作夢』吧。

自己作夢是傻氣、別人模糊是藝術。

打完這篇，窗外的雨水，突然把我的小小世界給模糊了。Now I am peaceful and cannot be better.
後記：99評鑑結果，這間研究所得到一等；我服務的系，得到二等。Very interesting!

自創的期中預警意見回饋 (draft stage)

★★★ Midterm Survey ★★★
Spring 2011
Instructor: 衛忠欣 (Jong-Shin Wei)
經濟學(二) (Principles of Macroeconomics)
管理數學 (Mathematics for Management)
Due: May 16, 2011 (sent to jsw12011958@gmail.com as an email attachment or submit the paper form 將填妥問題以夾檔電郵，或繳交紙本)
學校正在研議落實期中預警成效，也成立一個任務小組。正好是小組一員的我，先擬出簡單問卷，盼能增加任課教師對被預警同學的了解。正為了廣徵回饋意見，此次調查對象，範圍較廣，只要期中考在60分以下，都會收到問卷。人數甚多，請大家不要有壓力或放棄心態。個人資料皆保密。1~17題係單一選擇題。
姓名：
學號：
1~5 題為基本資料
1.我在本學期被預警的課程總數是
(A) 1; (B) 2; (C) 3; (D)超過3; (E)不知道
Ans:

2.我在本學期的學習，深受外在因素(如健康、打工、感情、家庭)的干擾。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

3.國際企業管理系，確實是我想就讀的學系。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

4.如果學校有專門的課後小老師(如同一對一家教)服務，酌收費用，我會自動報名
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

5.如果學校有專門的課後小老師(如同一對一家教)服務，完全免費，我會自動報名
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

下列問題，請針對經濟學(二)或管理數學之期中考不及格一事，進行意見回饋。如果兩門課不幸都不及格，請以平均(混合)的角度作答。
6.知道自己期中考成績不理想之後，至今我已經投入較多時間在預習與溫習。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

7.關於我的期中考不及格成績，應該負最大責任的是
(A)我自己；(B)任課老師；(C)進大學以前的老師；(D)家長；(E)其他(請略述)
Ans:

8.萬一很不幸地，期末仍不及格，應該負最大責任的是
(A)我自己；(B)任課老師；(C)進大學以前的老師；(D)家長；(E)其他(請略述)
Ans:

9.上課時間與考試前一週之外，大約每週花在學習此課程的時間為
(A)低於1小時; (B) 1小時; (C) 2小時; (D)至少3小時; (E)不知道
Ans:

10.我猜測其他填答者，平均在前一題的選項是
(A)低於1小時; (B) 1小時; (C) 2小時; (D)至少3小時; (E)不知道
Ans:

11.如果由期中考及格的同學作答第9題，我猜測平均的選項是
(A)低於1小時; (B) 1小時; (C) 2小時; (D)至少3小時; (E)不知道
Ans:

12.如果不幸此課程需重修，我下一次應該會順利通過。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

13.如果不幸此課程需重修，從此我對與此課程相關課業與職場技能，興趣盡失。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

14.如果不幸此課程需重修，我下一次仍然不知該如何修習。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

15.期中考試後，我大約每週花在學習此課程的時間為
(A)低於1小時; (B) 1小時; (C) 2小時; (D)至少3小時; (E)不知道
Ans:

16.如果沒有意外，我儘可能猜測這門課的學期成績是
(A) 80~100; (B) 70~79; (C) 60~69; (D) 0~59; (E)不知道
Ans:

17.假設大家的期中考都及格，我正好得60分，可是老師也將全班及格(all pass)這一事實，昭告天下。這一個假設性狀況，並不會讓我開心。
(A)非常同意；(B)同意；(C)無意見或不知道；(D)不同意；(E)非常不同意
Ans:

18.經過認真檢討與諮商，我目前對此課程修習的態度與方法，最大的改變是：
(請略述)
Ans:


(謝謝填答此一實驗性問卷，平時成績會加分)

Power acts upon you only if you presume it could

I saw it from my friend Jerry's page. Do not bother to check if he quoted from somewhere or he invented it. It is a good line anyhow.

一直不懂，為何學生常常有「被迫害妄想症」。 Is that because that they spent too much time on video games? Is that because 2012 is coming soon? 還是他們只是喜歡誇飾用語？ 還是中學教育很少有「論說文寫作」？

『我還有學分在他手上，否則 ...』

『我沒有學分在你手上，哈哈 ...』

『都畢業了，為什麼還不放過我呢？！！』

『雖然課程結束了，無形的壓力與恐懼仍在！』

這些話，其實都有上下文，也與說話者的性格特質有關。在習慣斷章取義的環境，可以被演化成災難。

Come on! Grow up! It is a harsh world (reality) out there. Many years from now, you probably will agree with me in saying that campus life is the easiest part in your entire life.

I had a dream. A student who just realized that he or she failed my course only had a quick response, "fuck (or shit)!" and moved on his or her life. A student who received high mark from me only had a quick response, "Thanks!"

What a wonderful world it would be! Of course, I must say that I am not complaining at all. If you cannot stand the heat, stay away from the kitchen.

To conclude, I will say: Believe what you choose to believe; get ready for paying the high costs of being ignorant or naive.

Silly questions (with obvious answers) are easy to be found on internet

6 ÷ 2(1 + 2) = ? My friends kept sending me this question, which is well circulated on internet.

In math, nobody is allowed to write like that. One can write
either
6/[2(1 + 2)] -- hence the answer is 1
or
(6/2)(1 + 2) -- hence the answer is 9.

In sum, nobody should write something like 6/2(1 + 2). Never!
Do not know why those people did not even have math knowledge at junior high school.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
後續新聞：
6÷2(1+2)=? 百萬人錯答「1」 臉書吸342萬人
更新日期:2011/05/04 06:30 蘋果日報
http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/110504/143/2qxb2.html
專家：先算括號 再由左至右
【陳威廷、楊惠琪╱台北報導】一題簡單的數學算式6÷2（1+2），竟難倒近150萬人，這題在社群網站臉書（facebook）吸引逾342萬名全球網友解答，結果有192萬多人答九，149萬多人認為是1 ，兩派網友還爭論不休。數學專家說，依由左至右的原則計算，答案應是9，因此約4成4人答錯。教育部指這麼多人算錯是一個警訊，將針對教學作檢討。
上月九日有網友利用臉書的民調功能詢問6÷2（1+2）等於多少，結果25天吸引逾342萬名網友回答。網友Nick Gray說，答案是9沒錯，除非2（1+2）上加中括號；Pierre Huillet 說答案是1，2(1+2)應先算才對
教授指題意不清
《蘋果》記者昨實際請2名小學生、4名高中生、1名大學生及1名社會人士回答該數學算式，結果5人答9，3人答1，答錯率近3成8；其中不乏北一女高材生凸槌，輸給小學生。
專長數學的國立台北教育大學資訊科學系教授王富祥表示，小括號內的1+2先算，之後算式變成6÷2×3，依算式左至右計算，答案是9。成功大學前數學系副教授郭堃煌說，此數學題題意不清，才造成答案有爭議。
北市胡適國小數學教師陳明仁說，此題屬四則運算，是小學五、六年級的學習範圍，四則運算的規則是「先乘除、後加減，有括號先算」，但乘和除位階相同，在算式中若同時出現，就要依由左至右規則來運算，但很多學生因邏輯不清，常敗在這類問題上。
運算時忽略邏輯
北市五常國中數學教師莊志明說，這題會出錯，可能是學生在答題時只記得「先乘除，後加減」，忽略了「由左至右」的運算規則，未來數學基礎教育有必要加強運算邏輯。
教育部國教司長黃子騰表示，這題數學不難，但做錯的人這麼多是一種警訊，不排除是學生做的題目太少或觀念不夠清楚，將針對此做檢討。
臉書數學題正解
題目6÷2(1+2)
★原則：由左至右計算，先乘除後加減。
★步驟1：小括號內的(1+2)要先算，結果得3
★步驟2：再回到原算式，乘、除號位階相等，自左至右計算為6÷2(3)=9
★網友答案
正確答案9：192萬5662
★回答人次
錯誤答案1：149萬6776
★網址：http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=question&id=1967593674538&qa_ref=ns!/profile.php?id=565634916
資料來源：王富祥、郭煌
----------------------------------------------------
教育部國教司長的數學，似乎不怎樣！

Solution to Midterm Exam (Spring 2011; Macro Principles)

Postscript: 基於grade inflation之普遍現象，教師有責任，將試題解答、同學整體表現(調分前、調分後)，予以公開。此課程係UB1大一必修課，大多數同學將於2014夏天進入職場(即所謂的class of 2014).

調分公式：raw or unadjusted score + 5
Results:
Average score: 60.7
Highest-Lowest: 91-40
Failure ratio: 49%
Threshold for issuing midterm warning (期中預警門檻): 50
期中預警人數: 15
一位缺考

Solution to Midterm Exam (Spring 2011; Math for Mgmt)

勘誤 -- question 17, Ans: D. [It is (0.2)(500)0.5 + (0.8)(2000)0.5. 感謝鄭雅婷同學之勘誤。]


Postscript: 基於grade inflation之普遍現象，教師有責任，將試題解答、同學整體表現(調分前、調分後)，予以公開。此課程係UB1大一必修課，大多數同學將於2014夏天進入職場(即所謂的class of 2014).

調分公式：(raw or unadjusted score + 15)(1.3)
Results:
Average score: 59.1
Highest-Lowest: 100-40
Failure ratio: 49%
Threshold for issuing midterm warning (期中預警門檻): 50
期中預警人數: 14
一位缺考
(updated on 04302011)

There are still players who do not follow the rules of the game

Through my involvement with an international journal I got a perfect example showing the consequence of ignoring the academic ethics. 即使在國內，一稿數投，仍時有所聞。

The following is what a journal editor wrote to the author:


This is to inform you that we are rejecting your paper, ms#12345, entitled

"xxxxxxxxx"

which arrived on Nov.9, 2010.

A referee, upon receiving our referee request, wrote us,
“I am afraid that the paper had been submitted to the journal,xxxx, some time in November/December 2010. I am not sure the decision of that journal. Perhaps it is still under review.”

A board member brought this case to my attention and I quote: “Multiple submissions are a serious academic misconduct, usually initiating actions such as informing the employer of the author’s home institution. We must block the author for any business in the future indefinitely. Unless the author can furnish some first-hand document from the editor(s) of “xxxx” to demonstrate that this manuscript was not under any consideration of that journal at the time the author sent it to us, we shall view the submission of ms#12345 as an intentional academic misconduct. Hugo Sonnenschein, one of my favorite leading economists, once admitted that, when he was still at graduate program, he sent his paper to three leading journals at the same time. Well, it happened in the 1960s and graduate students may not know the academic norm/practice well. Nowadays, it is well known that multiple submission is strictly prohibited everywhere.”

Why I firmly believe that I will have another happy year

最近同學開始一一詢問老師對指導畢業專題之篩選準則，為了證明我仍在狀況內，容我也報告如下：

我的準則是：

有意或無意要剝削我的，請找別的老師 -- 誰都可以 (of course, Prof. Wang is included. ha)。
還有 ...

以為我不懂沉沒成本與機會成本的，別找我。
以自己方便時間決定討論時間的，別找我。
寬容自己遲到爽約、不容忍我遲到爽約的，別找我。
沒辦法凝聚組員共識的，別找我。
拒繳保證金的，別找我。
沒修過我的選修課的，別找我。
想找王教授但被拒絕的，別找我。
想找我指導然後一直厚顏麻煩別的老師技術支援的，別找我。
不能努力且忍受讓論文題目套上「國際化」虛名的，別找我。
以為我靠微薄指導費買雪茄的，別找我。
不願在此按「讚」的，別找我。
沒看過這篇啐啐唸的，別找我。
心裡OS「保證讓老子(或本姑娘)如期畢業、就找你」的，別找我。
心裡OS「老子(或本姑娘)寧可不畢業、也不找你」的，別找我。
Note: 最後這一類，日後應該會大器晚成。讓一事無成的我，羨慕又佩服！

試問：還有人會想找我嗎？

極可能的標準答案：我自己。

只是，自己不能指導自己，而且我又不用修畢業專題！

In the end, I think that I will have another happy year.

賤嘴創意笑話 An office joke inspired by those who know who they really are

A secretary recently changed password for her computer at work. One day, her boss was in a hurry to use that computer but realized that he did not know the new password.

The computer only showed the hint for password: "That is who you are."

The boss tried several passwords such as hero, king, bratpitt, boss, ceo, Hitler, handsome, beautiful, god, and even honey but all in vain.

"What the hell the PASSWORD is! Can anyone here tell me about it?" shouted by the boss.

..... silence ...... silence

"Idiot," softly said by the secretary.

The boss could hardly hear that. So he raised his voice, "What did you say?"

"Idiot," again nearly whispered by the secretary.

Another employee just passed by and was shock, "What did you say? Dare you! How could you reveal his nickname?"

"I was just giving him the PASSWORD." said by the poor secretary.

Next day the company strictly prohibited setting the PASSWORD on any computer.

考試週 賤嘴創意笑話 A fruitful conversation earlier today inspired the following two jokes

話說有一對柏拉圖式戀愛的男女
女：我不喜歡沒有『功能性(functional)』的東西
男：我也是，farewell, my love
女：Likewise
O.S. That might be why Platonic love is hard to find.



An average-looking (with unique character) young man was walking with his pals. Two guys knew that he had a GF who could literally have his baby anytime. They joked about his active sex life. Suddenly,he said calmly: "Have never held her hand."
Two men were shocked, "How come? Liar!"
He said: "True! On our first date, I told her that hand-holding is sacred and must be saved for the wedding night. To be precise, I introduced her the notion of progressive dating (moves) backwards."

張大春與大學生的對話 (good for critical thinking and professional blog-writing)

全文原貌轉載如下

答大學生────關於狗屁的文化創意產業
2010-11-16 08:23 ｜迴響：208｜點閱：45068

網友大學生私人留言，公開作答：
您好，我是一名大學生，請問依您看來，「學界」有沒有義務因應「業界」的需要而改變學習課程的內容，甚或大到學術方向? 這麼問，是因為有不少業界人士跑到學界來(是誤人子弟?還是傳授經驗?)，業界或許有一些值得學習的實際經驗，但那常跟理論搭不上邊，畢竟不管有沒有學術背景都可以進入業界。例如：本校文學院開了一系列「創意產業學程」，(http://gogo.tku.edu.tw/cci/index.html)，裡面來自業界的老師，常常利用上課或作業來為自己的事業宣傳；另一方面，又可以在外的工作經歷上大膽地寫「大學教授」，儘管這些來自業界的教授參差不齊。 像這是一篇任教於淡江大學的業界人士的演講，(http://blog.yam.com/oakacorn/article/27775632)，我完全聽不懂他在講什麼。基本上，我也聽不懂他上課在上什麼。請問能為我解釋他的意思嗎?

答曰：光是看到貴校「文創產業中心」的「五大主修領域」裡有「創意漢學」，我就想向你致哀了。除了向你致哀，我還能作甚麼呢？
我仔細觀看並分析了貴校設立文創中心的一切說明和宣傳網頁（也建議我部落格的瀏覽客人都去看一眼），發現這這個中心就是建築在臺灣集體幻覺上的一個單位。這不只是貴校的問題，而要從整體臺灣的社會去理解。
我是一個寫作的人，我根本不承認有文創這回事，就好像我是一個正常的細胞，我不承認惡性腫瘤是我的一部份一樣。
文創產業的來歷是一群寄生蟲般的人物，在既沒有創作能力、也沒有研究能力的前提之下，逞其虛矯夸飾的浮詞，闖入原本的出版、表演、戲劇、影視、廣告、藝術展覽和交易等等傳統領域。進入了這些行業之後，他們與上述各領域的專業技術、教養和知識亦無關，他們的興趣和職責就是媒合政商資源，看起來充其量不過就是一種兼領經紀人和營銷者身份的幫閒份子。創作者拉不下臉來談生意，就需要他們。他們生意談大了，就回過頭來指導創作者。創作者要是沒出息一點，就等著被這種人掌控、消費或淘汰；創作者要是不要臉一點，就自己出面說：「我也是搞文創產業的！」可是憑藉著在業內幫閒的資歷，他們可以演講、寫專欄、出書，成為意見領袖，還彼此串合，虛構出「文化創意產業」這樣的語詞。還反過頭來告訴創作者：你們所幹的活兒，其實是我這個產業的一個環節、一個零件、一個「區塊」。
你也許還想問：文創的內容是甚麼？答案可以像這些寄生蟲一樣多變──他們自己反正也是騎驢找馬，連哄帶騙不需要準主意，條列整齊的綱領從1到9、從A到Z，拐人相信它有一套正式的演繹或分析架構就好，他們最高明的技倆就是把一堆行政、管理、財經、統計等科目中可以用常識化語言描述出來的訊息整編成一套冠以「產業」之名的雞零狗碎，摸著石頭過河。
詐騙集團要鍛鍊到極高明的境界，才能夠立足為文創產業；加入他們成為追隨者、學習者則只要夠愚蠢就行了。
親愛的大學生：從你的信裡我會看到良知與品行，如果你不希望浪費時間、浪費生命、浪費智能，建議你遠離這一套課程，因為共犯結構就是這樣的一種東西，正常細胞會死去，而惡性腫瘤一如蒙德羅梭的短篇經典所形容的那樣：「當他剛剛醒來時，恐龍還在那裡。」
http://blog.chinatimes.com/storyteller/archive/2010/11/16/564264.html

中文在英文通告之妙用 -- a simple example

(The following is posted on my door as well as in all my courses at e-learning.)

My office hours will be changed to “on-demand and flexible” basis due to the limited temporary power supply in building Z till the end of October, 2010. I will be working at home, or at coffee shops where air-conditioning service is provided.

How and when can you find me, if applicable? I will be easy to reach before and after class meetings. Class breaks too. I strongly urge you to make appointment via emails. I check emails at least twice a day at jsw12011958@gmail.com.
My cell phone number is 0912-604-341.

共體時艱
認同和包容

Those words are commonly seen nowadays. May I end this note with them.

結合網路流傳的佳言『喜歡你的人不需要，而不喜歡你的人不會相信』與一卡車的產官學人士掛在嘴邊的『企業倫理』 納入授課大綱

The following has been incorporated in syllabi of all courses I offer this term.

關於修課的態度、教學的熱忱、教師評分的客觀與否、同學填寫教學評量是否公允，這些重要議題，屬性就是主觀的，我們應該避免討論、解釋，用不著虛情假意、浪費時間。為什麼呢？因為喜歡你的人不需要，而不喜歡你的人不會相信。追求真理，才是所有討論與解釋的目的。努力取得現代公民應具備的素養，才無愧大學教育的金錢支出與機會成本。

有大智的教務長於開學準備週研習會提到，假設有老師表示，老師可能會依個人的不滿情緒，向評鑑委員爆料，教務長睿智的回應：「委員應該會記錄此類意見，但是導致不滿情緒的問題，並不會因此而解決或消失。」以此類推，同學可能會依個人的不滿情緒，在填寫匿名的教學評量時宣洩一番，此類意見確實會見光，但是導致不滿情緒的問題，並不會解決或消失。所以，良性與即時溝通、提出建設性意見，才是正途。本人歷年課程之學生整體成績與教學評量，都放在e-learning，力求透明化。每門課都要與企業(或職場)倫理相結合，同學考試不能作弊；教師打成績要有擔當；不用功就不要推說老師不會教；家長也不該既要求學校要嚴格、又不能接受被勒退的竟是自己的子女。緣此，教師、學生、家長、教務主管，都要恪遵企業倫理。

『e世代之標準化作業』 與 『在屋頂大聲告白的戲劇化思維』之小衝突

jsw: 剛才收到手機簡訊，同學姓名都沒給，只表示要加選 (嗯 … 為什麼不包飛機，在天空拉布條呢？)初犯原諒！下一封類似的天兵簡訊，會被原貌轉寄給校長、部長與教育委員會立委，讓他們知道，幾百億教育經費砸下去，還是有盲點。
難怪會有『生小孩的地方』的笑話。
Hint: 白癡色鬼、機智美女、給錢看好康的、公車、路邊的婦產科。
沒聽過這笑話的人，自己去 google 吧。


Student: 簡訊是我發的= =
我怕你今天沒有要上facebook，加上有名額限制，以防萬一!!


jsw: 從未聽說用簡訊卡位之事。真的要採用土法鍊鋼、也不想包飛機拉布條，可以學習岳飛母親。在背上(嗯 小腿或手臂亦可 -- 只要夠粗)刺青七字：『讓我加選微積分』。這樣...一般人應該會被感動。


Student: 我考慮採用。

Once a year ... 資訊透明化 是 end-users 的最佳對策 (updated in 2011)

Serah - Flight Of The Stork

Loreena McKennitt - The Lady of Shalott (LIVE)

黄莺莺 - 哭砂

Sealed with a Kiss

Agnetha Fältskog, an ex member of the Swedish 70's pop group ABBA.

All I ask of you

Angel

Sarah Mclachlan - I Love You (album : Mirrorball)

Detailed Solution to Examination One (summer session) -- Micro Principles

★★★ Detailed Solution to Examination One (Int’l Business Administration, WUCL) ★★★
Summer 2010
Instructor: 衛忠欣 (Jong-Shin Wei)
經濟學(一) (Principles of Microeconomics)
(07)342-6031 ext.6222
93001@mail.wtuc.edu.tw
jsw12011958@gmail.com

9:30 am ~ 10:40 am, July 9, 2010
Open books/notes exam (excluding texts written in Chinese). Absolutely no talking nor borrowing items during exams.，可使用自己的資料、字典或翻譯機。行動電話若響起，該生扣十分、以強調基本禮貌。務必工整依序作答。題目較多，目的在於測試是否有平日閱讀英文資料之習慣。Watch your time and have fun!
Part One: 20 Multiple choice questions. [By multiple choice in an English-speaking academic environment, we mean that you must choose the most appropriate one from 4 alternatives. 依慣例，答錯不倒扣！] 80 points
1. An economic agent, called A, has 20 hours to be spent on producing goods X and Y under linear (or fixed rate) technologies specified as follows. Spending a hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦20, on the production of X can bring him a/2 units of X (or expressed by x = a/2); spending  hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦ 20, on producing Y can yield a units of Y (i.e., y = a). A’s production possibility frontier (or PPF for short) is
(A) 2ax + ay = 20;
(B) (a/2)x + ay = 20;
(C) 2x + y = 20;
(D) x + 2y = 20.
Ans: C. [In light of linear (or fixed rate) technologies, since a hours can produce a/2 units of X, 1 unit of X requires (labor in the amount of) 2 hours. Similarly,a hours can produce a units of Y, implying that 1 unit of Y requires (labor in the amount of) 1 hour. Hence, 2x + y = 20.]

2. [continued from question 1] Since a/2 units of X are trade-off for a units of Y, we shall say that the opportunity cost of producing
(A) 1 unit of Y is 2 units of X;
(B) 1 unit of Y is 0.5;
(C) 1 unit of X is 0.5;
(D) 1 unit of X is 2 units of Y.
Ans: D. [a/2 : a = 1/2 : 1 = 1: 2]

3. [continued from question 2] We then conclude that
(A) A has the absolute advantage in producing Y;
(B) A has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(C) A has the comparative advantage in producing Y;
(D) None of the above (is true).
Ans: D. [Recall definitions of absolute advantage and comparative advantage]

4. [continued from question 1] The PPF of A
(A) has -2 as slope and two intercepts as 10 and 20;
(B) has -1/2 as slope and two intercepts as 20 and 20;
(C) has -2 as slope and two intercepts as 10 and 20;
(D) has -1/2 as slope and two intercepts as 10 and 20.
Ans: A. [The geometric properties of a line, 2x + y = 20 on the X-Y plane]
5. An economic agent, called B, has 30 hours to be spent on producing goods X and Y under linear (or fixed rate) technologies specified as follows. Spending a hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦20, on the production of X can bring him a/2 units of X (or expressed by x = a/2); spending  hours, with 0 ≦ a ≦ 20, on producing Y can yield a/2 units of Y (i.e., y = a/2). B’s production possibility frontier (or PPF for short) is
(A) x + y = 30;
(B) x + y = 15;
(C) x + 2y = 20;
(D) 2x + 2y = 15.
Ans: B. [In light of linear (or fixed rate) technologies, since a hours can produce a/2 units of X, 1 unit of X requires (labor in the amount of) 2 hours. Likewise,a/2 hours can produce a units of Y, implying that 1 unit of Y requires (labor in the amount of) 2 hour. Hence, 2x + 2y = 30 or x + y = 15.]

6. [continued from question 5]
(A) The opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of X is 2 units of Y;
(B) The opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of X is 0.5 unit of Y;
(C) The opportunity cost of producing 2 units of X is 2 units of Y;
(D) None of the above is true.
Ans: C. [1 : 1 = 2 : 2]

7. [continued from questions 1 and 5] Regarding A and B,
(A) A has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(B) A has the absolute advantage in producing Y;
(C) B has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(D) B has the absolute advantage in producing Y.
Ans: B. [For x = 1, A needs to spend 2 hours; B needs to spend 2 hours. For y = 1, A needs to spend 1 hour; B needs to spend 2 hours. Hence, A has the absolute advantage in producing Y. Incidentally, we can see from intercepts and numbers on the right-hand side of two equations. For A, 20 hrs bring him 10 units of X, 10/20 = 1/2. For B, 30 hrs bring him 15 units of X, 15/30 = 1/2. We have a tie here. For A, 20 hrs bring him 20 units of Y, 20/20 = 1. For B, 30 hrs bring him 15 units of Y, 15/30 = 1/2. Note 1 > 1/2. Measuring productivity (between two agents) is the key here.]

8. [continued from questions 1 and 5] Regarding A and B,
(A) Neither has the comparative advantage in producing X;
(B) A has the comparative advantage in producing X;
(C) B has the comparative advantage in producing X;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: C. [For A, the opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of X is 2 units of Y. For B, the opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of X is 1 unit of Y. Hence, B has the comparative advantage in producing X. Also, A has the comparative advantage in producing Y. Intuition? A’s PPF is steeper than B’s PPF.]

9. [continued from question 1] Now we introduce another economic agent, called C, who has 30 hours to be spent on producing goods X and Y. The PPF is x + y = 30.
Regarding A and C,
(A) A has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(B) A has the absolute advantage in producing Y;
(C) C has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: C. [For x = 1, A needs to spend 2 hours; C needs to spend 1 hour. For y = 1, A needs to spend 1 hour; C needs to spend 1 hour. Hence, C has the absolute advantage in producing X.]

10. [continued from questions 5 and 9] Regarding B and C,
(A) B has the absolute advantage in producing X;
(B) B has the absolute advantage in producing Y;
(C) C has the absolute advantage in producing both goods;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: C. [For x = 1, B needs to spend 2 hours; C needs to spend 1 hour. For y = 1, B needs to spend 2 hours; C needs to spend 1 hour. Hence, C has the absolute advantage in producing both X and Y.]

11. 基於 incentives and rational behavior 的認知，校長呼籲同學不要盲目熱衷展場美女(國內所謂的賣場showgirl)的打工之途，與下列何者相似？
(A) 如果知道要分手，當初就不該交往；
(B) 黃豆漲價，讓豆漿變淡，比漲價要好；
(C) 帥哥美女的追求者人數，真的不多；
(D) 在重視點名成績且有150名學生的課堂上，道德勸說同學勿伏案小睡。
Ans: D. [如果課業負擔不重，展場美女的打工機會，當然有吸引力。如果到課就有基本分數，即使精神不濟也會上課。]

12. There are three projects, 1, 2, and 3. The benefit from undertaking project i is B(i); the cost of undertaking project i is C(i), where i = 1, 2, 3. If we know that project 1 has the smallest opportunity cost, then
(A) project 1 has the largest net benefit;
(B) project 1 has the smallest net benefit;
(C) project 1 的淨效益，不可能等於 project 1 的機會成本；
(D) project 1 的淨效益，不可能大於 project 1 的機會成本。
*Ans: D. [To see why (A) is incorrect, consider the following example. Let B(1) = 10, C(1) = 6, B(2) = 10, C(2) = 4, B(3) = 8, and C(3) = 2. The opportunity cost of undertaking project 1 is 6 = Max{10 - 4, 8 - 2}; the opportunity cost of undertaking project 2 is 6 = Max{10 - 6, 8 - 2}; the opportunity cost of undertaking project 3 is 6 = Max{10 - 6, 10 - 4}.]

13. There are three projects, 1, 2, and 3. The benefit from undertaking project i is B(i); the cost of undertaking project i is C(i), where i = 1, 2, 3. If we know that only one project has the largest net benefit, then
(A)有最小機會成本的 project，必是有最大淨效益的 project；
(B)有最小機會成本的 project，未必是唯一；
(C)有最大機會成本的 project，必是有最大淨效益的 project；
(D) None of the above.
*Ans: A. [lectures]

14. Suppose that you chose to walk downtown to save $10 on a textbook priced at $30. Today, you will buy a computer on campus store at the price as $3000 even you know that the same computer can be found at a downtown store with price as $2960.
This reasoning is similar to
(A) 要求捐出一日所得，而不是每人捐2000元；
(B) 既然來到 all-you-can-eat 餐廳，我一定要拼命吃；
(C) 聽演講時，避免坐在最後一列；
(D) 勿以善小而不為、勿以惡小而為之。
Ans: A. [proportion!]

15. Suppose the net benefit of 1 is B(1) - C(1) = 10 - 8 = 2; the net benefit of 2 is B(2) - C(2) = 6 - 2 = 4. This is consistent with
(A)文藻實施全面點名的機會成本很大；
(B) sunk cost is important；
(C)明星球員應領高薪；
(D)妳愛1的程度超過妳愛2的程度，2比1還愛妳。
Ans: D.

16. The title of the movie we saw on the first day of class is
(A) Save the Earth;
(B) Earth;
(C) Our Home;
(D) Home.
Ans: D. [Obvious]

17. [continued from question 16] 該影片的旁白，一再重覆的是
(A) More and more;
(B) Faster and faster;
(C) Sooner or later;
(D) Bigger and bigger.
Ans: B. [Just see if you did pay attention to that movie.]

18. [continued from question 16] 該影片提到，紅樹林的快速消失，加害者是
(A) 養蝦場；
(B) 鯊魚；
(C) 水鳥；
(D) 螞蟻。
Ans: A.

19. [continued from question 16] 該影片提到，大幅度的森林變成農地，種植黃豆。約多少比例的黃豆，被用於歐亞地區禽畜的飼料？
(A) 50%;
(B) 60%;
(C) 75%;
(D) 90%.
Ans: D.

20. [continued from question 16] 該影片提到，在孟加拉，只貸款給窮人的銀行，實施30多年，
(A) 讓一億五千萬人受惠；
(B) 讓一千五百萬人受惠；
(C) 最後被爆料，竟然是在斂財；
(D) 創始者竟無緣得到諾貝爾獎。
Ans: A. [Additional information: 經濟學家穆罕默德．尤努斯(Muhammad Yunus)創建葛萊敏銀行(Grameen Bank)。穆罕默德．尤努斯於2006獲頒諾貝爾和平獎。You might also learn it in Money and Banking.]

Part Two: Analytical questions. [注意字體工整、邏輯順暢與不要出現錯別字或注音(與火星文)！如果字跡難以辨認，視同未答。畫蛇添足、答非所問、不知所云、自曝其短，將不利得分。] 20 points

21.你(妳)修這門暑修課程的機會成本為何？請扼要說明。
我為什麼不會問「你(妳)修這門暑修課程的淨效益為何」？
Ans: skipped. 如果要計算你(妳)修這門暑修課程的淨效益，就必須先估算暑修成績。

22.你(妳)未來在職場面試時，應不應該主動說明「這四年的教育都是全面強制點名的」？
Ans: No! [Why not? To be elaborated during lectures]


Performance:
12 students
Adjusting rule: (original score)(1.2)
Average: 56.3
Highest-lowest: 70-43


(撰寫試題無著作權；歡迎全貌下載流傳)

職場笑話 -- 改編加長版

據說是上班族票選第一名笑話 -- 改編後如下：

一隻蛇與一隻兔子在野外相撞， 兩人爭吵一陣後竟發現 ，彼此都是個瞎子，便惺惺相惜了起來。
蛇泣道：「我從小就沒了父母， 連水中的倒影也看不見，到現在我還不曉得我是什麼動物。」
「我也是耶！」兔子也感傷的說：「我也不知道自己長什麼樣子.....」
一陣長談，蛇想出了一個點子 ，它向兔子道：
「我想到了，我們彼此觸摸對方，告訴對方是什麼動物好嗎？」
兔子興奮的大叫 :
「好啊好啊好啊，我終於可以知道我是什麼動物了！」
蛇說 ：「我先來 ！！」接著他便把小白兔捲起來.....
「嗯！ 你有溫暖的身體，毛茸茸的身子，長長大大的耳朵，尖尖的鼻子，健壯的後腿，還有一小條尾巴，末端還附一個小毛球......」
「我知道了！！」 蛇高興的大喊： 「你是隻小白兔！！」
知道身世的兔子大喜 ：「該我了 ，該我了 ！！」便蹦蹦跳跳到了蛇的身邊,開始用鼻子觸摸
.....
「嗯？ 哇 ！！ 你是個冷血動物，臉皮跟身子皮都很厚，還有黏黏噁心外表，嘖嘖！有長長可以到處鑽的身體，但是竟然沒有肩膀..............哇靠 ！ 頭小小的沒什麼腦袋，嘴巴竟是全身最大的器官......天啊！！嘴巴裡有毒牙！！你老師的！！ 還有分叉的舌頭！！」
兔子突然大怒跳開：「你竟然是個公司主管 ！！」


蛇生氣說：「想騙我？」一口把兔子吞下去。
旁邊一隻烏龜開口：「我在這裡呆了20年，你猜我是什麼動物？」
蛇便把烏龜捲起來..... 烏龜馬上縮頭不動裝死。蛇一放開牠，烏龜就碎碎唸、又爬得慢。蛇一靠近，烏龜又馬上縮頭不動。
蛇輕蔑的說： 「你是公司的小職員！！」

啟示：主管也是上班族，小職員有心聲，主管亦然

On ignorance, mistakes, rules, discretions, and corruptions

Disclaimer: This is not my story as I smoke cigars and occasionally am a pipe-smoker. To me, smoking cigarettes causes terrible smell, just as most of you will agree with me.

甲是外國人，不知道室內公共場所已經是全面禁煙。甲問他的英語家教學生乙，是否介意甲來根「飯後煙」，乙說沒關係啊，你當然可以消費你買的東西。少數顧客向餐廳老闆抗議，乙辯稱甲對他很重要、也謊稱自己不知煙害防治法。是地方首富的乙，建議老闆把抗議者請出去，索性把餐廳改為「有煙餐廳」(NOT a smoke-free restaurant)。老闆想了一下，反正老闆自己平日也偶爾在廚房偷偷哈上一口，這回既然有乙承擔責任，也就真的如此做了。老闆還對自己的行動力(Just do it -- no matter how much it costs)自豪，也不忘酸一下被請出去的顧客：「這是我的店。」結果餐廳生意大跌，招牌還沒換新，環保人員來開罰，只看見甲一人悠閒地在吞雲吐霧。

不知法而違法，不嚴重　-- 告知後，要求改正即可。
以謊言掩飾誤判、以謊言掩飾違法，都很嚴重。
一人犯錯，是常態。直線組織裡的多人交疊犯錯，終將結束組織的生命，這就是社會科學重視的議題之一：腐化 (corruption)。

An open letter to students in UB4 before their graduation

Dear students in UB4:

這是班導師第一次、也是最後一次給你(妳)們的公開信。首先要恭喜大家，學業告一段落，應該興奮地邁向人生的下一階段。即使有極少數延畢同學，也應該滿懷喜悅與抱持感恩之心，只是晚半拍離開這個四年的環境罷了。(上課不是也有遲到的嗎？遲到的同學，未必會有較差的學期成績。)當年我大學畢業時，也是如此心態。估計諸位至少還有60年的人生旅途，所以這四年只占十五分之一，很多喜怒哀樂，終將變成不重要的回憶。然而，我敢預言，這四年的歷練，應該是獨一無二的。

正因為『獨一無二』，我衷心希望，贈送大家「誠信、原則」四字，盼望大家能一生受用。有人應該聽說一些關於下週一晚宴的最新發展，身為班導師，我有責任提供第一手報導。在系學會會員大會(與系師生座談會合併舉辦)之前，系學會會長就客氣地與我商議系學會送舊晚會之地點問題，在過程中我也提醒她，當初我逐一發送 MSN 訊息，籲請 UB4同學繳交會費，一來糾正常見的大四生不繳會費之怪象，也保證系學會的送舊餐會能與謝師宴合併舉辦，可望節省時間、人力與金錢。在當天會議中，我又報告一次，包括系主任在內，與會的老師也聽到此一小小創舉。未料，五月初，系學會竟然告知：系學會送舊，與謝師宴是兩碼子事。我立即發信提醒會長與系主任，所得到的答案，甚至出現「搭便車」這類字眼，令我詫異、遺憾。

我在部落格寫道，我遺憾、也抱歉，曾經眼瞎耳聾為不值得付出的團體或個人背書、支持。我有自由，不參加有違誠信原則的活動。我有義務，拒絕為有違誠信原則的活動助陣、鋪路。身為教育工作者，我不可能現身說法，告訴同學：「背信是可以被接受的。」我任教的課程裡，作弊是不被允許、也沒發生過。胡搞瞎搞的企業確實存在，希望諸位將來不會遇到，至少趁還沒踏入社會之前，我們能提供正確的示範。基於此原則，我無法為系學會這樣的行為背書，也不應該參與。

不同於二十年前的校園文化，今日的系學會，已是一社團組織，系主任是當然的指導老師，只是不像其他社團的指導老師，沒有校長的聘書，學務處也好意讓各系自行輔導。系上老師，沒繳會費，但是基於教師使命感與情緣，總是希望在旁助陣、協助。我當然會憂心，往後系學會如何能收到大四生的會費？該說的話已說，能幫忙的也做了，自認問心無愧。

有人問：「你會生氣嗎？」基本上，這都是教育的一部份，學生犯錯，是可以被原諒的。我真的覺得，系學會此舉，陷我於不義，因為我勢必失信於諸位。已經繳交系會會費的同學，如果相信我這裡的歷史陳述，請接受導師的道歉。因為不相信會有(部份)退費之奇蹟，我誠懇地自掏腰包，補償繳費者每人一百元(正好是會費的三分之一)。非全額退費，並非異象，大家就看開一點，爾後保持一些戒心。如此，我們親身體驗『誠信』之可貴，堅守「原則」之勇氣。也是一件好事！

如果有同學想與導師聊天吃飯，我還蠻好約的。費用不是問題，大家依照所得的「比例原則」推算即可。這兩年我與同學的小組餐聚，不是進行的還好嗎？我在學生時期，與尊敬的老師吃飯，也都是如此，將心比心，也是良好的傳承。我計劃為「原訂計畫」奉獻的一些紀念品，將改留給我們的小團體聚餐抽獎用。

感謝同學閱讀至此，請相信我逐字敲打的時間，應該是諸位瀏覽時間的十倍，該相信我的誠意吧。

祝
一帆風順！

衛忠欣

後記：
"Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?”
"My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness."

I saw those two quotes (from Bible) from my friend's web site after typing this letter.
Now I know where I got the strength and courage to stand tall and have faith.

如何牽線 -- (case study) materials for the course Workshop on Information and Negotiation

Case: A 與 B 同為一家傳統產業的小主管。A 利用總經理的莫名其妙信任，在缺乏自知之明 (see my posting on facebook) 的情況下，開始違反行政倫理與體制運作，搞一些自己發明的小動作。B 的部門，予人有些搖搖欲墜之感，讓 A 更能理直氣壯，直接伸手介入B 的部門事務。(想到古人有所謂屍骨未寒之比喻，在此，人還活得好好的耶。) B 不敢上稟總經理，因為老總已經「充分授權」。我告訴她：還有董座啊！ B 說：我那敢驚動老董啊！
深知董事長是一位有智慧的傾聽者與信徒，我該如何牽線呢？

Solution: 我將下列內容，同時寄給董事長與B。Email 的主旨是 『引子』。

歷史學家卡西烏斯．迪歐紀錄了一則發人深省的歷史事件，是關於公元117–138年間羅馬皇帝哈德良。
「有一次，有個女人在哈德良行經的路途中向他哀求。一開始，哈德良對她說：『我沒有時間聽妳的請求。』但是當她後來對他喊著：『那你就別做皇帝了！』哈德良聽了便轉回來，聽她所要提的請求。」

很多帝王或忙碌的經理人，總是不希望被人打擾，上帝不像他們。

----------------
case study continued...

董座回信：God's ways are far beyond our imagination. I happened to meet B.

Detailed Solution to Midterm Examination, Math for Mgmt, Spring 2010

Detailed Solution to Midterm Examination, Macro Principles, Spring 2010

★★★★ Detailed Solution to Midterm Examination (Int’l Business, WUCL) ★★★★
Spring 2010 Instructor: 衛忠欣 (Jong-Shin Wei)
經濟學(二) (Principles of Macroeconomics) (07)342-6031 ext.6222
93001@mail.wtuc.edu.tw jsw12011958@gmail.com

3:30 pm ~ 4:50 pm, April 26, 2010
Open books/notes exam. Max: 111 points in 80 minutes; absolutely no talking nor borrowing items during exams.，可使用自己的資料、字典或翻譯機。字典或翻譯機之使用，限在前30分鐘之內。行動電話若響起，該生扣十分、以強調基本禮貌。務必工整依序作答。題目較多，目的在於測試是否有平日閱讀原文書之習慣。Watch your time and have fun!
Part One: 30 Multiple choice questions. [By multiple choice in an English-speaking academic environment, we mean that you must choose the most appropriate one from 4 alternatives. 依慣例，答錯不倒扣！] 75 points

1.The measure of GDP can take into account of efforts in
(A) protecting environment;
(B) creating more jobs domestically;
(C) slowing down the rate of resource depletion;
(D) fighting with the cocaine trafficking.
Ans: B. [See p.322, text]

2.It is fair to say that while measuring the aggregate output, we put more weight on
(A) services provided by the government sector;
(B) goods produced by the production sectors;
(C) black market activities;
(D) high-priced goods and services.
Ans: D. [See p.323, text]

3.Henry is a writer who married June, who stays home doing unpaid housework and child care duties. If June chooses to work at a law firm while paying someone to do the housework and child care, in the spirit of GDP computation, we shall say
(A) there will be an increase in GDP but it is over-stating;
(B) there will be an increase in GDP but it is under-stating;
(C) there will be a decrease in GDP but it is over-stating;
(D) there will be a decrease in GDP but it is under-stating.
Ans: A. [See p.324, text]

4.It is very common in Taiwan that grand parents help with child care when both parents go to work full-time. In light of this and in comparison with what happens in USA, we shall say that the GDP in Taiwan seems to
(A) be over-estimated;
(B) be under-estimated;
(C) take into consideration of the quality of child care;
(D) fall due to the low birth rate.
Ans: B. [See p.324, text]

5.Education provided by public schools
(A) is not sold in markets;
(B) is not included in GDP because that it only helps with the quality;
(C) is not included in GDP because that we cannot find the market price for it;
(D) None of the above is correct.
Ans: A. [See p.325, text]

6.(基本時事題) Choose the correct statement.
(A)經濟部長是施顏祥；
(B)經建會主委是陳沖；
(C)經濟部長是蔡勳雄；
(D)金管會主委是李紀珠。
Ans: A.

7.(基本時事題) 依據行政院主計處，我國的經濟成長率，係
(A)按民國95年價格計算之國內生產毛額的年增率；
(B)按民國85年價格計算之國內生產毛額的年增率；
(C)按前一年價格計算之國內生產毛額的年增率；
(D)國內生產毛額的年增率。
*Ans: A. [Test if you follow information given on internet.]

8.A paid B $900 for baby-sitting last night. Today B spent $800 to have her hairs cut. For each hair cut, the assistant got paid (by the owner of the hair salon or gallery) in the amount of $100 (for washing hairs etc.) When we compute GDP, it is meaningful to
(A) view 900 + 800 + 100 as the increase in income;
(B) view 900 + 800 as the increase in expenditure;
(C) view 900 + 100 as the increase in income;
(D) view 900 + 700 as the increase in income.
*Ans: B. [See pp.325-6, text]

9.張三收成一批葡萄，他將一半的收成賣給李四吃，賺取$50,000。至於剩下的一半，張三自己吃去一半，將另一半拿去發酵釀酒，自製的私酒偷偷賣給王五喝，張三賺取$40,000。張三種植葡萄，對GDP的貢獻是
(A) 100,000;
(B) 90,000;
(C) 50,000;
(D) None of the above.
*Ans: C. [張三收成的葡萄，市值為$100,000。50,000 + 40,000 = 90,000. 私酒是在黑市交易，不能計入。See p.326, text]

10.(Learn economics from watching movies.) In the movie Cast Away (浩劫重生), Tom Hanks lived in an island alone for years. During that period, if we view that island as an economy, her GDP
(A) is zero because that Tom was lazy;
(B) is zero because that there was no market;
(C) is zero because that Tom’s time had no value;
(D) is not zero because that Tom worked hard to survive.
Ans: B.


11.John paid $4,000,000 for a new apartment in 2000. He sold that apartment for $2,600,000 in 2010. The real estate agent earned $160,000 in this transaction (from the seller and the buyer, of course). Regarding John’s transaction in 2010, the contribution to GDP is
(A) 4,000,000 - 2,600,000 - 160,000;
(B) 4,000,000 - 2,600,000 + 160,000;
(C) 2,600,000 + 160,000;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: D. [It is 160,000. See p.328, text]

12.「以價制量」的經濟(干預)政策，不易付諸實施。下列何者不屬於此類？
(A)Carter administration proposed to use gasoline tax to reduce the USA dependence on foreign oil;
(B)Increasing unit tax on cigarettes to discourage smoking;
(C)以死刑來嚇阻犯罪；
(D)知名學校希望提高研究所考試的報名費。
Ans: C. [trivial; lectures]

13.The main reason for implementing the mandatory immunization laws is
(A) The situation at which all were vaccinated is Pareto efficient;
(B) It helps increase government’s revenues;
(C) Evidence (such as what happened in the Boulder County of Colorado) shows that self-insurance works better;
(D) The best outcome to me is that I remain unvaccinated while all other people were vaccinated.
Ans: D. [pp.298-9, text]

14.Recall the green vs. red experiment (also see the extra credit question at the end of this exam paper). Relating it to the HINI immunization event last year, we see that
(A)實際接受疫苗注射的普遍度，類似大多數人選綠球；
(B)實際接受疫苗注射的普遍度，類似大多數人選紅球；
(C)如果張三接受疫苗注射，事後不會後悔；
(D)唯有百分之百的疫苗注射率，才是社會最適解。
Ans: A. [lectures; pp.298-9, text]

15.Which statement is true regarding the health care costs in USA?
(A)They account for 20 percent of national income in 1940;
(B)They account for 40 percent of national income in 2009;
(C)Main reasons for the sharp increase from 1940 to 2009 are inflation and sophisticated high-tech developments;
(D)The main reason for the sharp increase from 1940 to 2009 is the emergence of the third-party payment system.
Ans: D. [lectures; p.299, text]

16.Government-financed medical insurance
(A)不包括我國的全民健保；
(B)包括美國的HMO；
(C)立意在於防止醫療資源的浪費；
(D)是一種third-party payment system。
Ans: D. [See p.299, text]

17.Andy just had a minor surgeon. His demand for hospital stay (measured in days) is given by P + 50Q = 300. Hospital room charge is $200 per day. Without the insurance covering his hospital stay, how many days will Andy stay in the hospital?
(A) 1 day;
(B) 2 days;
(C) 3 days;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: B. [p.300, text. From P = 200 and P + 50Q = 300 we get Q = 2.]

18.[continued from question 17] If Andy’s hospital stay is fully covered by insurance, then how many days will Andy stay in the hospital?
(A) 2 days;
(B) 3 days;
(C) 6 days;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: C. [Andy is maximizing his consumer’s surplus by choosing Q = 6.]

19.[continued from question 18] Andy’s consumer surplus is
(A) 1800;
(B) 1200;
(C) 600;
(D) None of the above
Ans: D. [It is (300)(6)/2 = 900.]

20.[continued from question 18] Compare question 18 with question 17. Andy’s medical insurance causes a loss in medical care resources measured by “room charges due to extended stay minus Andy’s extra benefit”, which is
(A) 400;
(B) 300;
(C) 200;
(D) 600.
Ans: A. [It is 4(200)/2 = 400; see p.301, text]

*21.[continued from question 20] Suppose that the insurance provider offers Andy an option: He can get $x in cash, but he must pay the room charges, and the length of his hospital stay is exactly the answer to question 17. If both the insurance provider and Andy become better off when Andy agrees to that option, what would be the number x?
(A) 1300;
(B) 700;
(C) 800;
(D) 900.
Ans: D. [Andy finds it attractive due to 900 - 400 = 500 > 400. The insurance provider finds it attractive due to 900 < (200)(6). See p.301, text]

22.[continued from question 21] What happens to the hospital’s revenue?
(A) It increases by 800;
(B) It decreases by 800;
(C) It decreases by 600;
(D) None of the above.
Ans: B. [(200)(6) – (200)(2) = 800. Recall lectures]

23.Examples of in-kind transfers in Taiwan include
(A)老人津貼；
(B)消費券；
(C)急難救濟金；
(D)免費營養午餐。
Ans: D. [Notice that消費券 is quite different from food stamps in USA.]

24.It is 3 pm on Monday and you are a piano tutor who is teaching kids piano at your apartment. A carpenter is doing heavy work at your next-door neighbor’s apartment. The noise he is making forces you to stop your teaching. You both understand that you earn money by tutoring while he makes a living by working as a carpenter. Suppose that you both can negotiate at no cost and you both know what Coase theorem is all about. [Lucky you both!] If both agree that everyone is entitled to the environment without noise, then
(A) you should pay him and ask him to do his job at another time and this arrangement will make both better off;
(B) he should pay you and ask you to reschedule your session and this arrangement will make both better off;
(C) he must stop working in order to avoid the law suit;
(D) whoever pays another person to reschedule will be worse off.
Ans: B. [See p.273, text]

25.[continued from question 24] If both agree that doing house remodeling work is allowed during a weekday afternoon, then
(A) you should pay him and ask him to do his job at another time and this arrangement will make both better off;
(B) he should pay you and ask you to reschedule your session and this arrangement will make both better off;
(C) the best you can do is to reschedule your session and ask for nothing;
(D) whoever pays another person to reschedule will be worse off.
Ans: A. [See p.273, text]

26. (與新聞相關的活用題)前一陣子，中國大陸某地方首長來台。該天夜晚台北101大樓突然燈火通明。有一些反對人士大罵浪費、不環保、抱大腿。被罵的一方，則找了一些有些牽強的理由來搪塞。其實，被罵的一方可以搬出經濟學原理，來進行有效的辯護，那就是
(A) We live in a world full of informational asymmetry;
(B) Turning on those lights can prevent missiles attack from China in a cost-effective way;
(C) The government can subsidize private property owners to plant trees or to turn on all those lights to generate positive externalities;
(D) Since those lights are public goods, meaning that everyone can benefit at no cost.
Ans: C. [Make sure you know why (D) is not a good choice.]

27. Being an economic naturalist might help you with your social life. Adam and Eve are dating. Suddenly they have a big fight and that makes both thirsty. “Let us drink something and we will split once we finish the drink,” agreed by both. They face two choices: (1) each has a cup (250 cc) of coke; (2) both share a cup (500 cc) of coke (of course, each has a straw).
(A) If they want to make the date last longer, they should go for (1);
(B) If they want to make the date last longer, they should go for (2);
(C) No difference between (1) and (2)
(D) The waiter might prefer (1) to (2).
Ans: B. [See p.283, text]

28. Example of avoiding or resolving the tragedy of the commons do not include
(A) 國人習於構築籬笆或矮牆，圍成私人庭院；
(B) 讓師生領養校園花木；
(C) 持續開放系辦公室空間但是嚴密喧譁、小睡或進食；
(D) 對社區網球場收取使用費。
Ans: D. [See p.281, text]

29. Examples of excludable but not rival consumptions do not include
(A) fire protection;
(B) driving on a toll road at 5 am;
(C) driving on Highway 88 at 5 am;
(D) watching movies on HBO channel.
Ans: C. [Recall lectures]

30. The office of the department of international business administration is where students can spend some time during the class break. If you, having learned economics principles and heard about the vision from some faculty members, are asked to name that place, which name will you pick most likely?
(A) Tiger’s Paradise;
(B) Toyota’s Resort;
(C) Freedom’s Corner;
(D) International Commons.
Ans: D. [Think about the common resources. No need to explain how the adjective ‘international’ is conceived.]

Part Two: Analytical questions. [注意字體工整、邏輯順暢與不要出現錯別字或注音(與火星文)！如果字跡難以辨認，視同未答。畫蛇添足、答非所問、不知所云、自曝其短，將不利得分。教師也有權公告具有特色之作答。] 30 points
31. There are three industrial firms in the Dark Age Valley, A, B, and C. The initial pollution level for A is 50 units; for B is 80 units; for C is 70 units. Under the current technology, the cost of reducing pollution by one unit is $20 for A; $30 for B; $10 for C. At present, the government gives each firm 50 tradable pollution permits.
Firm A proposes to sell 10 units of permits to firm B; firm C proposes to sell 20 units of permits to B. The price of tradable permit is (agreed to be) 25. Carefully explain, with data, why all three firms will benefit from trading pollution permits in this way. Which firm benefits most? Which firm benefits least?
Ans:
For A, (25)(10) - (20)(10) = 50, greater than 0. Note 50 - 0 = 50.
For C, (25)(20) - (10)(40) = 100, greater than -200. Note 100 - (-200) = 300.
For B, -(25)(30) = -750, greater than -900. Note -750 - (900) = 150.
Since (1) the total pollution level is still kept at 150 and (2) all three firms prefer participating in this trade (and the follow-up) to no-trade , we can call it Pareto-improving.
By 300 > 150 > 50, we see that C benefits most, followed by B.

32. Recall the materials I showed during lectures regarding比中指事件。How can we relate it to the teaching/learning of externalities? Be specific and organized. 偏離主題必後悔。
Ans: The intention (of the Office of Students Affairs) of using that incident to remind students of the importance of appropriate conduct and image issue is understandable, if not well received or highly appreciated. However, leaving the issue of violating traffic regulations unattended, ignoring the possibility that the woman in photos might be in the process of making some video/photo for homework assignment, failing to note that we are obliged to publicly announce that “Smile, you are on hidden camera” before we video-tape them, and publicizing those video-taped materials without properly protecting those involved might very well generate externalities. People might think: Don’t they have more important things to do? 這與最近大家詬病的所謂「網友發動網路人肉搜尋」，有何不同？如果判斷力不足的學生，被誤導去四處拍照搜證文藻教職員生的活動，豈不是又回到文化大革命時期的紅衛兵、聞香隊之行為？
Note: 至於無法得到分數的答案，如：因為學校的關注，造成老師多講了這個話題，因為他只需教授經濟學，不需多講此事件。這就是外部性。

Extra credits question: RED or GREEN? Make your pick.
如果你選擇紅球，相對多數的同學也選擇紅球，我會加你3分。
如果你選擇紅球，相對多數的同學卻選擇綠球，我會加你0分。
如果你選擇綠球，相對多數的同學卻選擇紅球，我會加你4分。
如果你選擇綠球，相對多數的同學也選擇綠球，我會加你1分。
Note: In case there are 28 REDs and 28 GREENs, then the relative majority (to you) is GREEN if you happen to choose RED; the relative majority (to you) is RED if you happen to choose GREEN.
33.你會選擇紅球還是綠球？ 只能擇一！
Findings:
41 Students chose GREEN; 14 students chose RED.

34.你猜相對多數的同學，在上一題是選紅球還是綠球？只能擇一！猜中加2分。
Findings: 44 students guessed correctly.

(撰寫試題無著作權；歡迎全貌下載流傳。)

當下到處可見 grade inflation。同學是相互競爭、不是與老師較技。
所以有調分公式：(原始分數 + 10)*(1.3). Average: 61.8. Highest is 90; lowest is 33.
期中預警 13人

A real-world example illustrating sunk costs, cost-benefit analysis, decision-making, and game-playing

I am teaching an elective course, Applied Game Theory, this term. According to the course syllabus, there will be in-class final exam, no midterm exam, and class will be held as usual during the midterm exam week. [You see that I do observe and comply with the rules set forth by our school. Are you, my friend, Lady M, also a VP, reading this now?] There is only one task on syllabus for the meeting in midterm exam week, which is “individually check the progress of game-playing assignment.”

On April 26, 2007, the day before the scheduled meeting, an idea stoke me that perhaps I could run the progress-checking in a more cost-effective and more efficient way. So, I sent out an email via e-learning platform to all enrolled students. I stated clearly that nobody would be asked to show up before 4:00 pm. From 4:00 pm to 4:30 pm, about eight students (names given specifically) would go thru the process with me on an one-on-one basis. Another group will be treated from 4:30 pm to 5:00 pm, followed by the third and the fourth group. I thought that everybody would be happy with this arrangement although it was announced just 24 hrs ahead of the time.

Now let me share with you my conversation with Mr. C. Lin on April 27.
At 3:57 pm, Mr. Lin came to my office with no expression on his face: "I have been waiting for you almost one hour."
I replied: "Got you! How many times do I have to remind you of the importance of checking emails sent thru e-learning?"
He calmly stared at me and slowly moved toward the elevator.
"Are you leaving? Hey, if you leave now, very likely I will hold you for being absent for two or three hours (in class meeting). Come on, it is not worthy! You will lose everything." I said.
"I have wasted one hour already. If I choose to stay, I will have to wait for another hour before you run the scheduled check on my case. In total, I will waste two hours and there is still a chance that you may keep me waiting longer. That is why I should be smart and take off." He replied.
"Wait a minute! Have you forgotten about sunk costs I taught in principles of economics? Do stay! I will not break my promise. Trust me"

What happened? At 4:01 pm, I saw Mr. Lin quietly sat in the classroom and waited for his turn. I will say that he was making a rational decision. Why?
Since he did not get that email notification, he paid the price by wasting one hour (from 3:10 pm to 4 pm). But that is the so-called sunk cost, which should be irrelevant in the following argument.
If he chooses to leave at 4 pm (after speaking to me), he will not get the benefit and the cost to him will be two or three hours counted as class absence.
If he chooses to stay, he will get the benefit and the cost to him will be one hour as the foregone waiting time.
Hence, the cost-benefit analysis tells us that Mr. Lin, provided that he is rational, should stay. And he did! Good for him.

Of course, if I do not keep my promise and somehow handle his case around 6 pm, he will get the benefit but the cost to him will be two hours as the foregone time. Even for this worst scenario, it is still better than his leaving at 4 pm. Besides, if he takes my strategic action into consideration, we will have a two-person game. As I assured him of my commitment in keeping my words, neither of us should have thought about the game-playing.

Credits: 雖然C. Lin偶爾會有所謂的嗆聲動作，他時而能夠即時回答問題，也曾對經濟學小考問題，提出有水準的批判見解。比起一些老僧入定或是喬裝乖乖牌的同學，要強多了。文藻週的至少兩天下午，(我個人覺得有些奇怪的)經典閱讀活動曲終人散時，我由走廊經過，只見他一人在教室默默地還原課桌椅。他的動作，令我聯想起電影「天之驕子」裡，男老師於開學第一天，在空教室對齊書本與桌緣之一幕。就憑這些觀察，日後只要他開口要推薦函 (references)，我一定樂意相助。

An Example of Incorporating youtube to Teaching

(to be used in teaching the course, Workshop on Information and Negotiation, on May 3, 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVGKAIS7Q4g

source:
dxmonline — 西元2009年07月20日 — 肯．羅賓森爵士(Sir Ken Robinson)以生動活潑的案例來談教育制度。他深切希望教育制度能培育而非扼殺學生的創意。


Notes added by jsw:

This is good for teaching public speaking, not really suitable for discussion on education (and policy-making). It is like the comedian show, popular in some western countries, not in Taiwan. [The show ‘David Allen at Large’ was on TV long time ago when I was in USA.]
我不贊同「教育扼殺創意」這類娛樂新聞標題煽情化之句子。
有基本邏輯思考訓練的人，應該知道：我們把教育，視為一種機制 (mechanism)，有足夠人數的所有可能的學生構成的集合，視為一種社會 (society or the set of all profiles)。如果我們檢驗後發現，針對社會裡每一類的 profile，實施教育這一種機制，對學生的創意，有抹殺打壓之影響，才能下結論：教育扼殺創意。
反之，如果有10萬學生，其中8萬位算是循規蹈矩，只是怎麼教怎麼學，也不會有創意。7000位是透過教育洗禮，變得有創意。1000位天生就有創意，不幸在教育過程中被淹沒或犧牲。12000位則是教育體制的漏網之魚(也就是浪費教育資源的學生)。
我們不能說：
教育制度必能培育學生的創意。
也不能說：
教育制度必會扼殺學生的創意。

一些沒有創意的人，常會怪罪教育制度不好，害他喪失創意。這種人到處都可見。
A拿菜刀砍死B，是A的錯，不是發明菜刀的人之錯，因為菜刀的用途，不是用來砍人的。
以前不只一位國文老師說過一則故事，萬惡不赦的盜匪在行刑前，要求生母給他吸一口奶，竟咬斷乳頭，表示都是母親沒教好。其實，十歲左右的我，那時就不相信會有這種事，撇開講述者是否有心理問題或嚴重意淫，也不談在古代那種文化背景，充滿肅殺之氣的刑場怎麼會有人脫衣服，自己殺人犯罪，最後竟然怪罪母親縱容他，我無法理解。現在更相信我當時的認知。
以該講者為例，如果他一直在家中，與老人家、寵物，談天氣聊是非(用流行俚語形容：嘴砲)，度過15~20年，會有這種犀利幽默智慧？才怪！

P.S. 用字遣詞，是藝術，是功夫，更是態度與教養問題。正因為這樣，我不會加入『墮落教師聯盟』的粉絲團。那裡有很好的討論平台，發言人也不易是狀況外的嘴砲快閃族，只是粉絲團的主打介紹詞，竟是

『你很賭爛現在教育制度嗎?
你以墮落為己任嗎?
你夠瘋狂沒人把妳當老師嗎?
歡迎加入粉絲團支持我們
讓我們繼續 "有叫無累" 吧
"一日為師...終身墮落"』

Being stupid is unacceptable (story continued)

別再嚷嚷『學校怎麼教的都是以後用不到的理論！不知道這是不是你要的答案』，自己問自己：那家公司願意雇用笨蛋！

A: 單位來了位新人。主管要求他們去調查，其他學校XX系的國考錄取率。我說可以用今年考生或學生家長的身份去刺探敵情。未料，她打電話大剌剌地說：我是X校XX系，因為要評鑑資料，所以想知道貴系的國考錄取率。笨笨笨笨笨！

B: WOW! I thought that she called her boyfriend or mom for help. 我見過這類助理。You might tell her: 順便問對方有沒有缺。

A: 昨天還真的問到一家，不過對方晃點她說會再寄資料給她。

(一週後)

A: 最近那位新人有好消息了！甲校XX系系主任跟她說，必須先E其他學校的國考率給他，甲校才會回覆。結果新人興沖沖地把所有收集到的情報寄給了甲校XX系系主任。未料，甲校XX系系主任發現乙校XX系系主任尚未回覆，就給了一個不錯的回答：『因為乙校XX系都沒填，所以我們也不填，等乙校XX系回覆了，我們就回覆。』今天，那位新人氣炸了！

B: 甲校XX系系主任真是好樣的，不費力就取得他校的國考率資料，他是孔明後裔嗎？也許應該請他到訊息與談判課程，來一場協同教學，分享他這類草船借箭的絕活。我腦海閃過一幕，新人以那位童顏巨乳明星的嗲聲嗲氣語調，加上田中千惠在海角七號的獨特日本腔國語：『好討厭喲！他們都欺負我！』

以前看過一部浪漫日片，每年雨季來臨時，已逝的情人(竹田結子飾演)會出現。也許改成，雨季來了，笨人潮也隨即到來。

(borrowing some words from an old song, End of the World)
Don't they know
it is the end of the world
'cause stupid people are everywhere

由簡短留言與回應 看邏輯推理之趣味與應用

無意間，在部落格捕捉到一小段有趣的留言與回應。

Miss A (who is a friend on internet whom I never met nor spoke to) posted on her blog: 我可以接受外貌不佳的人...但無法接受外貌不佳、學歷不高又內涵空空、談話LOW...的人..
Mr. B: 我也滾遠些
Miss A: Mr.B...你是外貌出色的人...什麼都沒有 也沒關係..


What exactly were on the mind of Miss A?
1. 她接受的人，也許有外貌不佳的人。
2. 如果外貌不佳的人，被她接受，他一定不能是
(i)學歷不高又內涵空空 且 (ii) 談話LOW...

所以
如果外貌不佳的人，被她接受，他可能是學歷不高又內涵空空，但是不會談話LOW...
如果外貌不佳的人，被她接受，他可能是學歷高或有內涵，但是談話LOW...

彙整得知，
外貌不佳的人，只要符合以下任一條件，就可能會被她接受：
(a)學歷高；(b)有內涵；(c)不會談話LOW...
此外，
外貌既不佳、學歷也不高又內涵空空且談話LOW...的人，則不可能會被她接受。
OS: 如此看來，她的標準不算嚴苛。

3. 由她對 Mr. B的友善回應，解讀為：外貌出色的人，一定會被她接受。緣此，不被她接受的人，一定是外貌不出色(即不佳)的人。所以，只要我們知道：張三不被她接受，就可推論，張三的外貌不出色(即不佳)。
OS: 此話一出，應該沒有人會坦承(或希望)「自己不被她接受」。她可以落個耳根清靜。
注意：這並不是說：任何外貌不出色(即不佳)的人，一定不會被她接受。

Question for further interest:
一般所謂的「外貌協會(會員)」，究竟指的是：
外貌出色的人，一定會被(她)接受
還是
會被(她)接受的人，一定是外貌出色

Policy or Disclaimer

Sometimes I write stories (in the preliminary version) which might come from my dream land but sound so familiar and close to our lives. Digging out the truth won’t do us any good. If something is real, people tend to say that it is fictitious to protect innocents. If something is fictitious, people promote it by saying that the least expected will come to you anytime anyhow. Some readers might wish them to be true while some do not. I have hereby determined that publishing my preliminary thoughts here is acceptable for the following reasons:

1.I offer a disclaimer that the contents here are not intended to harm any reader in any way;
2.My posting offers the readership of this blog a chance to research into the involved issues at their own cost and risk, eventually fostering our understanding of the society;
3.The term “professionalism” calls for a profession -- i.e., a money-making activity. Nevertheless, this blog is a consuming asset rather than a producing asset -- i.e., I don't get a (bloody) dollar for doing this. So I can be as professional or unprofessional as I want.
(I borrow some words from a blog by Mr. Brian Gill.)

由還錢談起 (To repay or not to repay -- that is the question)

由還錢談起 – Yes ... my dear friend lost in contact, I am thinking about you... and, to be specific, the money I lent to you some years ago

Prof. Jerry Liu is proud to be a weekend vendor. I admire him and admit that I am too impulsive to do something like that. On the top of that, I surely will exercise the price discrimination toward customers. In light of that, I might do something on which I seem to have comparative advantage (to some extent). Here is what I have in mind. Twice in a week or so, I shall post some crazy (or naive) thoughts here as open questions or questions that demand serious follow-ups rather than cheap answers.
Here is the first one:
期盼友人還錢，真的比中統一發票還難。可是，很多學生卻能輕鬆地說：『老師教過的，早就還給老師啦！』(難怪老師不易瘦身？) 緣此，應該調漲學費。保留知識、不還給老師的人，日後可以部份退費。至於還給老師的人，既然豪氣萬丈，當然不必退費給他們。會計室是最大贏家。
forgot to add: 當政客貪污、醫生與教授舞弊新聞爆發時，民代、教育界、民意異口同聲，要求他們以前的學校(e.g., NTU among others)，應該對倫理教育負責之時，怎麼沒想到，他們只是把學的東西，早就還給母校呢？To me, it is not much different from the situation at which quite a number of students taking my economics or professional writing courses already returned whatever they learned from me. No big deal.
如果是我當家，也許在英語初戀營的宣誓詞，加上:
敬天愛人；學多少、算多少、Never repay!

從心做起

最近電視台的談話性節目，一窩蜂地談論陸生來台與大陸學校向台灣優秀學生招手。幾位所謂的名嘴，滿臉憂愁，一直說政府再不拿錢出來，我國人才都跑光啦。
好多年前，讀過一篇文章，提到印度的經濟、統計人才之培養，令美加與歐洲讚不絕口。印度沒有好的硬體設施，有的是敬業態度。看看我們國家，中小學也要建一流的視訊會議廳，體育館、游泳池、電子跑馬燈看板，比比皆是。還有同學要求請假單全面e化，認為反正要求學校普設掃瞄器即可。(何不乾脆要求每校撥發一億元，大家植晶片？)觀念不改，穿金戴銀，還是不改草包內涵。教授與學生穿的是西服或套裝、細肩帶小可愛、脫鞋？不該是話題焦點。課程有沒有真材實料，才是重點。今天聽到學生談及某位老師，直誇她的好。我與她雖是點頭之交，也欣賞她這位老師。我不願、無法、也沒資格去討論她是不是好老師，但是我知道她的教學評量分數超高。令我失望的是，同學們認為她是好老師，理由竟然是「她不會驚醒上課睡覺的同學」。我帶諷刺語氣對同學說，這學期妳沒有她的課，睡眠也許不足吧？

以美國為例，這十年來，師生利用部落格(blog)交流，已經很普遍。沒有人會寫一段意見，然後加註：
Students in ECON101, please respond

這學期的訊息與談判實作，我透過作業，想激勵這類自由學風。可惜見到不少：

(請討論一下 "xxxxx")
(新題目) xxxxxx
(大家我改題目了!!!) xxxxxx
xxxxxx 請大家發表一下意見


然後一群好友來捧場，革命感情確實了不起(不會輸給電影色戒的那群流亡學生)。只是偶有搞笑來亂的、有文不對題的、有亂放電的、有斷章取義的 ... 我們老師的研究，不是這樣完成的。
也讓我想到：有時見到同學，在期末考試時，伏案小睡20~30分鐘，然後狂寫幾分鐘。原先以為同學蒙周公指點，功力大增。閱卷時，才發現只是重抄題目、抒發自己學習心得，最後祝福老師假期快樂、強調自己無法暑修、一定要準時畢業，才對得起父母與列代祖宗。如果 …如果我們的學生『拜託』老師給60分，老師『拜託』學生在期末評量客氣給分，這樣的學習環境，五年五千億的額外補助，也沒用！

A joke to make your day

女兒是爸爸上輩子的情人?

在飛機上，我跟一對父女坐同一排。
小女孩她爸，看得出約三十歲左右。小女孩，長得挺聰明可愛的，大概是小學一二年級。
空姐發食物了，小女孩兒一拿到，非常高興的打開吃，想必是餓壞了。
父親：「你謝謝阿姨沒？」
小女孩很可愛的說：「謝謝阿姨」
父親：「跟阿姨說，阿姨你真漂亮。」
小女孩這時語氣變了：「“阿姨，我爸說你真漂亮。我爸每次看到美女就會這樣」
她爸爸楞了一下.....
空姐聽的高興的說：你問問爸爸是要牛肉飯還是雞蛋麵？
小女孩依然還是那腔調：不用啦，他看見美女就飽了。
空姐很尷尬的說：那就牛肉飯吧。
然後空姐走了.......
這父女倆又說上了，可語氣完全不是父女，而是好像很好的哥兒們或是姐妹掏鬥嘴的那種，小女孩說話也好像是個小大人。
她爸爸：我剛才是那麼說的嗎？
小女孩：好了啦，我還不知道你心裏在想些什麼啊！你能不能不要這樣啊，只要我媽一不在，你就開始了，你覺得你這樣好嗎？
她爸爸臉都綠了說：再廢話我以後再也不帶你出來！
小女孩：哎呀，您還是趁早不要帶我出來好了。我現在就覺得我在這裏是多餘的。像你這種男人當初我媽願意嫁給你就該偷笑吧。人家都說女兒是爸爸上輩子的情人，我就感到奇怪了，我上輩子是不是瞎了眼不然怎麼看上你呢？

旁邊的人全都低頭偷笑，飯也差點噴出來了!

Source: 網路文章；來源無法考證。美女友人 Jewel Lee 熱心分享。如有無聊狗仔小人，想要提告侵害智慧財產權，先去告Jewel Lee 看看。

Postscript:
1.基督徒是不相信輪迴轉世的。如果我不是基督徒，這種說法，也有些盲點 -- 爸爸上輩子的長相與態度，未必與現在一樣。此外，女兒上輩子，說不一定是宇宙無敵超級大恐龍妹耶！
2.就策略談判而言，這段對話，可能已經讓空姐印象深刻。應該遠遠勝過「爸爸直接問空姐：我可以與妳交朋友嗎」！

又有天兵提供靈感 -- 見怪不怪、該怪不怪、要怪就怪別人

Student L:
學校沒有充分的說明去實習的學習內容，只是一味的宣揚實習會增加未來工作的實務經歷，這樣是否為變相的誘導學生呢?

jsw:
如果以上邏輯是對的，試問，
被抓到的捷運襲胸色狼：『上面露半球、背部露丁字褲的辣妹，也沒充分說明她不是穿來勾引我，只是一味的賣弄、刺激我的生理反應，這樣是否為變相的誘導我這一類的好男孩呢?』

Student H:
以這樣的邏輯，全天下再也沒有人會侵犯上面露半球、背部露丁字褲的辣妹，而被視為色狼了。因為他們都是好男孩!

jsw:
H 寫道：『全天下再也沒有人會侵犯上面露半球、背部露丁字褲的辣妹，而被視為色狼了。』
建議H去修中文寫作

Student L:
To H: 若是穿著很性感的女生引起男生的生理反應，你可以解釋成為女生在誘導男生，目前為止都和我的邏輯相當，但是若男生做出不法的動作，就不一樣了。這就關系到法律的問題!!
舉例:
電玩游戲代言人或是主持人都要找身材窈窕或是穿著清涼的女性來擔任，廠商就是想吸引男性加入游戲。(以上電玩代言人是有薪資的誘因才會穿著清涼，而廠商也是有不確定性的收益;等同於學校會有一定的產學合作企劃，而同學則是有不確定性的學習成效)⋯⋯

Student H:
To L: 以邏輯思考，變相誘導學生就好比老師舉例的"變相誘導我這一類的好男孩"，因為沒有充分的說明去實習的學習內容只是一味的宣揚實習會增加未來工作的實務經歷就像老師舉例的"被抓到的捷運襲胸色狼：上面露半球、背部露丁字褲的辣妹，也沒充分說明她不是穿來勾引我，只是一味的賣弄、刺激我的生理反應"
老師只是對你敘述句子的邏輯性，跟捷運色狼論是不是有異曲同工的感覺。
如果老師敘述的話，可做為襲胸犯罪者澄清自己並不是色狼而是好男孩，那被抓到的捷運色狼，都可以在襲胸後說:我並不是甚麼色狼，會襲胸並不是我願意的，是因為我被人誘導後才會做出襲胸的動作的，不應該直接稱我這類的好男孩為色狼。

jsw to H (or should I direct it to L):
Were you drinking again while posting? Here is my advice often given for writing class: 逐字唸你寫的，錄音後成沉澱一天，然後聽錄音、不看螢幕，你會覺得這是外國人在說話。Time to stop and move on. In closing, let me make clear once and for all that I was just trying to point out the problem with logical reasoning in student L's comment. 總之，我發現有人中文閱讀與寫作，有大問題。

當學校提供實習機會，除了基本說明之外，基於誘因或行銷技巧，當然會為實習遠景美言好幾句。學校提供學生一個自我選擇的機會，結果選擇實習的學生，竟然大剌剌質疑學校在變相的誘導學生！所以我舉辣妹為例，假設辣妹有自信，穿出性感，當然希望她心儀的男孩會注意與接近她。如果你長相愛國、個性悶騷又愛意淫，(正所謂)不是她的菜，你去襲胸被逮，你的理由是辣妹在放電、變相的引誘大家，也沒有充分告知 (1)你不是她的菜 (2)乳溝與股溝僅供遠觀。這樣的色狼，豈不是白癡？

我當然不是在鼓勵色狼，或是幫色狼脫罪。我是採用類此推論 (A:B = C:D)，告訴 Student L，她的思考模式，讓我想到那位既是色狼、又是白癡的虛擬人物。

英文、創意、理論、實務、性 -- 2010雜念

A student, to my surprise, scored 240 points in 大專英檢（CSEPT）, could not understand　
"All I can and will say is: Watch out the high opportunity costs of dealing with trash."
Well, maybe he was just lying.

也驚訝現在的學生，不知讀莊子或林語堂的書，難怪沒有創意思考能力。不喜歡的，就是理論。沒有被要求到的，就是自己最喜歡追求的實務。可是，理論二字，也有保護罩的功能。假設我開一門棒球課，學期已經過了1/3，還沒教投球與揮棒。有人質疑，我就說：『理論基礎很重要啊，我要先教基礎與基本功。』
常見不入流的業界人士與政府官員，一直說學校要幫學生的未來雇主，教導學生實務的能力。自己政策推動不力或是公司虧損時，就推說：『理論上，不該這樣啊。』

Robert Solow once joked about Milton Friedman by writing something like: “Milton always writes about money (貨幣). Well, sex is constantly on my mind but I keep it away from my writing.” Since I am not Solow, I shall write a little bit about sex. And it is my blog, meaning that I can say whatever I want.
在我是學生的年代，健康教育都是偷偷地、仔細地讀完，絕大多數同學在20歲以前，還沒性經驗，也不會吹噓或假裝純真。當今的大學生，就不一樣了。請問：『關於那檔事 … 在我是學生的年代，我們是重理論；在30年後的今天，學生是重實務。』這樣敘述，可以嗎？

上週，Alex 與我幾秒鐘腦力激盪，產生一小品： 『我不是不會扣籃，只是目前還在鑽研理論的部份。』

Back to late 1980s, when I was a graduate student at Purdue. It was quite common (and possibly still is now) to see that students often shied away from taking theory courses (kind of dry). Recall that a decrease in supply will make the price go up. When theorists were hard to find, some students would brag about their expertise in theory. Professor James C. Moore, who was a solid economist (specializing in math econ and trade theory) and my role model for years, once said: “Do not claim you are a theorist unless you really are.” I still remember the reaction on the faces of those senior graduate students. It was a cold winter morning and the room was central-heated. After his words, the room was cold as outdoors and one could almost hear one's heart beat. Bingo!

Prescribed Task vs. Realized Outcome

C同學問起點名之事，我決定先試著說明，該制度的設計者，當時可能的想法：『在設計點名制度時，請假不是常態, …』。
結果L同學回應：『請假真的是少數案例嗎?你可以去問問看老師嗎?』.

Unbelievable! 也許我們先不急於國際化，應該先提升同學的中文閱讀能力。
醫生接生嬰兒時，大家都會誇讚祝福嬰兒。嬰兒成長為有用的人，這是 prescribed task. 有些人不幸成為智障、敗類、人渣、人魔，這是 realized outcome. 有人分不清楚 prescribed task 與 realized outcome?? 讓我想到：吃了會拉，何不直接吃屎？ 還有情歌裡的：早知會分手，當初就不該愛你。
Conclusion: The economy may not be bad as thought. 因為一堆人吃飯免錢
Note:
1.吃飯免錢 = 白吃 = 白癡 (因為寫錯字)
2.去年指導一組同學，寫畢業專題，題目是：論「釋放訊號」在大學校園的認知 -- 以文藻點名制度為例。同學告訴我，一位小主管明白指出，研究點名這類議題，與國際企業管理不相關，似乎把這份專題報告視為家醜。(The rest is history.) 不到半年時間，由UB3同學的電郵發問，顯示他真是多慮 -- 連同系學弟妹都完全不知這份專題報告！令人啼笑皆非。

難得見到同學對教室管理的意見 (from a mini series of comments on facebook)

jsw: "親愛的衛老師，請問你認不認同上課的時候，少數同學以"噓聲"來警惕其他少數同學討論功課的作法？" 以上是路人甲同學問我的問題。
我猜測他是認真的問，我當然是要認真的答。What do I think? 討論功課是好事，只是不該在課堂上進行，老師拿鐘點費，是唯一的供給者。如果我得罪玉皇大帝，被罰去教棒球，我會要求同學先跑三千公尺，耗掉20分鐘，然後將同學分組，討論30分鐘，然後每組負責人報告或示範，接著開放集體討論。我最後總結，誇讚這是教過最好的一班。重點是一學期下來，沒有人會注意到 ... 我根本不懂棒球！

Miss T:恩，我還是會繼續討論的，哈!!!

jsw: Dear Miss T, 還好妳不在我課堂上 ....... 我的噓聲不夠力 得靠橡皮筋來制止討論聲 相信大家可以諒解 哈!!!

Mr. P: 基本上我同意老師所說的：討論功課是好事，只是不該在課堂上進行。我想這是我們都知道的，但也都是許多人所做不到的，我想少數同學以"噓聲"作為警惕，可其實這對老師、以及其他認真且安靜上課的同學相當不禮貌，畢竟噓聲在國際禮儀所代表的含意實在不佳，所以那些想警惕討論功課的人是否有更好的辦法？我個人淺見是，老師上課要是被吵雜聲吵到不能上課，便會安靜，這時班上的聲音頓時少了麥克風的音量，我想同學們應會有自知之明察覺要安靜，以回復正常上課秩序！

jsw: Mr. P, When did you begin to observe class activities? haha I am impressed although I still have reasonable doubt. 這幾年我一直有奇想 -- 讓椅子可通輕微的電力。別笑 也許有一天會實現。不過，聰明的美少女如 Miss T (see comment left above) 會備妥絕緣衣物。緣此，還是橡皮筋最合成本效益原則。

Mr. P: 好方法，太棒了，我愛你！！

jsw: Dear Mr. P, With all due respect, how many times do I have to tell you... do not say that you love me since I do not love you. Do you know that LOVE is an expensive good? After all, you do not love me, you just love to claim that you love me. So, stop making such a false claim.

Mr. P sent a hyperlink 劉若英的歌『我等你』 (Youtube)

jsw: Dearest Mr. P, 我當然知道劉若英，一點點喜歡她、不至於愛她。 你還是別煩我吧。不然 我請 Richard 在導生晤談簿誠實記載： 『P同學愛上男老師』 保證你以後要勤跑輔導中心 -- trust me! You won't like that. 陳副座要你們勤跑外語診斷中心，不是輔導中心！

Mr. P: 好吧 cry cry

落幕 Happy ending.

天兵也會貢獻靈感

天兵秦同學 (I truly do not want to reveal his identity) 在FB留了些蠻白目的話，我用暗喻提醒他，此類留言，應該匿名行之。沒想到，天兵竟追問：要如何匿名留言啊？
認真想想，真是好問題耶。
Here are my suggestions.

(1). Put all those trash/garbage talk on Word document and submit it electronically to the newspaper with a pen name that can strongly convince the editor that the author is some idiot. Since most people will never admit that they are idiots, the editor might take special interest in checking it out immediately. Pen name must be used since you have no right to ruin the reputation of your school or work place.

If (1) does not work (and I bet in any amount of money that it won't), try (2).

(2). Write all those trash/garbage talk on toilet papers. Use them to wipe your butt and flush them to the toilet. It is nice because you can do it daily. By doing so, you will accomplish the task of bringing 'talking shits' and 'real shits' together. It also leaves no evidence and comply with the recycling policy. In addition, if you use heavy ink while writing and wipe hard on your butt, names of those in the context might be accidentally printed on your butt. In a way, one could say that someone is kissing your ass. Is that amazing or what?

Real GPA vs. Nominal GPA -- who is going to buy them?

Accidentally I found the following (not-so-new) quote from internet.

‘Less than 2 percent of grades given at elite institutions are D's or F's, and that at schools such as Pomona, Duke, Harvard and Columbia, about half of all grades are A's. … Harvey Mansfield Jr., a Harvard government professor, has tried on his own to draw attention to the problem by giving his students two grades — one that's officially reported for transcripts and another, lower, that reflects what he feels they truly earned. "I remember when a B was an honors grade — today a B-minus is a slap in the face," Mansfield says. "I still give two grades. When I stop, that's when you'll know we've started to make progress."’

Let’s face it. Who on earth (or on campus?) will care if I assign two grades – one nominal and another real?

The website created by Stuart Rojstaczer, a professor of environmental science at Duke, www.GradeInflation.com, contains very interesting data of many universities in USA. [For instance, at Purdue, GPA ave is 2.71 in 1980 and 1990; 2.81 in 2006. At Princeton, ave is 3.13 in 1980; 3.22 in 1990; 3.27 in 2006. At FIU, ave is 2.72 in 2006. At Cornell, ave is 3.13 in 1990; 3.36 in 2006. At Harvard, ave is 3.05 in 1975; 3.30 in 1990; 3.45 in 2005. At Vanderbilt, ave is 3.28 in 2006. At Nebraska-Lincoln, ave is 3.07 in 2006. At Duke, ave is 3.02 in 1980; 3.21 in 1990; 3.42 in 2006. At U. of Oregon, ave is 2.95 in 1992; 3.10 in 2004. At U. of Minnesota, ave is 2.77 in 1970; 2.88 in 1980; 2.83 in 1990; 2.95 in 1997. At Middlebury, ave is 3.10 in 1990; 2.29 in 2000; 3.34 in 2004. At Lehigh, ave is 2.6 in 1972; 2.97 in 2000; 3.15 in 2007. At Ohio University, ave is 2.66 in 1986; 2.82 in 1990; 3.01 in 2004.] Now I remember why, as a graduate student in the 80s, I was so eager to study at places such as Purdue and Minnesota. Professor M. Watts, who was the course coordinator while I served as a graduate instructor, did a good job then (and afterwards).

The following links might be of some interest.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-03-27-princeton-grades_N.htm

http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/2003/03/blowing_up_grad.html

Another research topic is the teaching evaluation inflation.

Syllabus for Workshop on Information and Negotiation (Spring 2010)

(to be read backwards. That is, view the jpg file on the bottom first)