Mar 27, 2011

HUONG IN NEED - STEVE INDEED




Once upon a time, a "friend in need" complained to her "friend indeed" that her energy for her Biology class had spent itself!

The "friend indeed" did not say anything when hearing that complaint, but wrote two awesome emails to his "friend in need" :


Dear Huong,

You sounded disappointed last night. Yes, you have to study in two languages at the same time.

You've been here two years and are taking an incredibly hard class in English and Latin.

Earlier, I told you, "I don't know how you do it." This morning, talking with my wife, she said, "I don't know how she does it."

OK, so you're a puzzle.

You also are the smartest person I've found in that room. You are very quick to learn. You are skilled at encouraging others and helping them learn, too.

You can do this. All we have to do is pass. It does not have to be a competition with the others. The grade does not necessarily indicate what you have learned.

You told Ray once that you really enjoy the class other than the exams. That means you're learning it and will retain the information well when you are out in the workplace.

You can do this.

Steve


Another thing.

All we need to pass the class is an average of 69%. I figure that should really be 70%. 70% of 960 total points is 672 points (662.4 if you figure at 69%).

So add up your total points. (Lab 1 + Lab 2 + Quizzes 1-4 + Lecture 1 + Lecture 2 = X.)

Subtract from 672 and that will tell you how many more points you Need To Pass. (672 - X = NTP.)

Divide that by 5 more tests and that is the average score you need if you get 0 on the next two lab tests. (Y / 5 = Z.) That is the worst case scenario.

For a better scenario: If you add some points for the next two quizzes before you divide by 5, that is the Realistic Average Score you need on the next 5 tests.

(NTP - 20) / 5 = RAS or Realistic Average Score

X + 20 = TP or Total Points

(672 - TP) / 5 = RAS

That is the better scenario.

All we need to do is pass. You are learning the material either way.

Don't worry. I'll worry for you. Isn't that better?

Steve

No comments: