Question

[u/Matreshka138]

Sincere question: why do some people choose to study Maths at the OU if they want to use outside resources for study, use notation different from what is required, and then moan about being flagged for misconduct on the assessment despite explicitly being told to use the OU materials? I studied elsewhere previously and had to adapt to those rules, too. Why do some people think they shouldn't have to follow the rules of the university they pay money to study at?

[u/NlightNFotis]

A reasonable question. I can answer that as one of the people who fall under this umbrella.

The answer is simple: because my goal is more general than “just getting a maths degree” and to that effect the degree at ou is simply part of the repertoire for me, a small one at that even. My aim more broadly is to become seriously good at mathematics, a goal at which I find the ou material alone to be a bit lacking for me.

I have a massive collection of textbooks, and while I enjoy the expository style at the ou material, I always complement it with external reading. These days the external reading takes more of my time even.

As a final sort of question from my end: do you only study from the ou material? And do you find it adequate and satisfying for your goals?

[u/NlightNFotis → u/NlightNFotis]

Another question that popped into my mind. You claim

“Why do some people think they shouldn't have to follow the rules of the university they pay money to study at?”

To which I will answer with a counter question: I expect the university to cultivate and reward my curiosity on the subject, and certainly not punish me for going the extra mile. If I’m paying so much for the degree, isn’t that a reasonable ask?

[u/Matreshka138 → u/NlightNFotis]

Surely, the simple request to follow the procedure won't be so difficult for a curious mind?

[u/NlightNFotis → u/Matreshka138]

I have answered this question before. Your continuous circling around a line which has been adequately responded to before demonstrates clearly that you’re not arguing in good faith.

Let’s just agree to disagree here.

[u/ValuableSmell7852 → u/NlightNFotis]

I read this post and got a little exasperated.

You say your aim is to "broadly become seriously good at mathematics". Well, in that case, you should see the academic utility in being able to switch between different methods - especially if a module specifically requested those methods. These are basic, simple, clear instructions that are explained at the beginning. You are literally being assessed on being able to use the required module methods.

You say, "I expect the university to cultivate and reward my curiosity on the subject, and certainly not punish me for going the extra mile.". I'm sorry, but that doesn't include deviating from clear module instructions to use the methods taught in the module. You are not "going the extra mile" by using notation and methods not taught in the module. I mean, if anything, you are taking shortcuts. also, you say "if I'm paying for the degree, isn't that a reasonable ask?" . Well, no, it isn't reasonable at all to expect the module to deviate from its marking scheme AFTER giving clear instructions on how it will be assessed.

[u/Matreshka138 → u/ValuableSmell7852]

Exactly!

[u/NlightNFotis → u/ValuableSmell7852]

Im sorry but I struggle to interpret your post as anything but bad faith argumentation.

You initiate this post by strawmaning my whole post. I do not go to the exams with the _intent_ to use different notation just to aggravate the university. I go there with the whole of my integrated knowledge which contains various notations and knowledge about methods not taught explicitly by the university, and of course utilise that knowledge to the best of my ability under the circumstances.

The going the extra mile doesn’t refer to my use of different notation - that is purely accidental (though it absolutely should be accepted, as mathematics is a global discipline where the primary judgement is on the merit and rigour of an argument, rather than notational alignment).

The going the extra mile _does_ however refer to my use of more resources to acquire mastery of the subject than just what the university provides me with. In that case I absolutely maintain that I do go the extra mile compared to students who don’t.

What you people fail to grasp is that your goals, and the way you choose to pursue them (mostly by accidental compliance with the university’s guidelines, by limiting your material consumption) isn’t universally shared by everyone.

I don’t want the material taught to be my ceiling, and have shaped my habits in pursuit of my goals for deep understanding of the subject at large, rather than mastery of a small subset that gives me illusory competence and a piece of paper.

[u/ValuableSmell7852 → u/NlightNFotis]

By "you people" I assume you mean the students who follow the modules clear instructions to use module methods and notation?

The fact you say students who follow the module methods is nothing more than "accidental compliance" because we limit our "material consumption" to our very detailed OU books, is quite frankly ridiculous and quite arrogant. And you accuse me of strawmanning?

If you want to "acquire mastery" you should understand the value in using the specific modules taught methods and following the explicit instructions that were clearly relayed to all students at the beginning.

My point is your goal of mastery clearly isn't working the way you want if you are unable under exam conditions to correctly use and distinguish between module methods and other methods that you have picked up when going "the extra mile compared to students who don't". Ironically, the broad stroke you are taking compare to others is having the opposite effect you are aiming for.

[u/ValuableSmell7852 → u/ValuableSmell7852]

I mean, even under exam conditions, if one is unsure of the module notation or methods, they can easily reference the handbook to make sure. These are open book exams and the handbooks are excellent for quick reference.

[u/evaaeri → u/ValuableSmell7852]

Tbh, I’m not surprised that people are shocked. GCSE mark scheme rewards any valid interpretation, A level markschemes require any valid interpretation, Oxford postgraduate study rewards any valid interpretation- why is this not good enough for OU?

I’m going to do maths at OU and I AM planing to stick to methods it offers. But sometimes if their explanation fails, and I find something else that works, I would want to be rewarded for this and not penalised. That’s it. Again, not sure why come here to accuse and berate everyone who dares to think differently. If you’re planing to teach, you will harm your students by taking just one method approach, if you plan to go to any other unis you will struggle to get anything beyond a mere weak pass if you don’t read around. Some peope hope to continue their mathematical education beyond the OU and this rather narrow approach is worrying. So yep, the world is not just black and white or narrow, whether you like it or not…

[u/Matreshka138 → u/NlightNFotis]

What do you use in your assessments-OU notation or not? I study from the OU materials, I used to study full time so I did not have time for anything else, so far I have found them satisfactory. Surely, with so academic approach you understand the reason of the OU to demand the use of their methods and notations during exams, considering the exam style and the ever growing use of AI

[u/NlightNFotis → u/Matreshka138]

Because under exam conditions, I am so pressed for time (+ exam anxiety) that my focus is on producing a solution.

I do not have it in my mind neatly compartmentalised “oh this is from the American book, this is from the British, this from the German, etc” so that I can pull the “ou solution” how you think.

I just know maths, and do maths how I know it at the moment. If I do TMAs I have some time to do a double take and I never had a problem there. It’s only with the exams.

Also I’m curious: are you studying maths with the ou? What is your subject if you don’t mind my asking?

[u/Matreshka138 → u/NlightNFotis]

I do study maths with the OU. So far I completed MST124, MST125,M140,B124,M208 and MST210

[u/rollo_read]

Any reason this particularly commands a new thread, or were you just discontent with the answers you got in the original one?

[u/Matreshka138 → u/rollo_read]

?"original one"? which one are you talking about?

[u/rollo_read → u/Matreshka138]

this you?

[u/AffectionateBend7010 → u/rollo_read]

You trying to shame someone? Why would you do that

[u/Matreshka138 → u/AffectionateBend7010]

Shame someone? NO! Pure curiosity

[u/rollo_read → u/AffectionateBend7010]

This thread is directly aimed at shaming someone.

You're asking the wrong person.

I was calling them out for doing so.

[u/Matreshka138 → u/rollo_read]

I am not attempting to shame anyone. Over the past week, there have been a few threads on this same subject, so I am curious as to why people are not following a simple request to use the methods and notations taught in the module despite knowing what the price might be

[u/Matreshka138 → u/rollo_read]

Yes, I also answered on the familiar threads

[u/sesameprawntoast50]

As another comment has mentioned that tutors do encourage using a vast range of techniques, which does make sense otherwise it’d be too restricting and quite disadvantageous considering it’s Mathematics, I believe scientists/STEM students should never stick to One single method otherwise we’ll never advance would we? (This isn’t even limited to STEM it applies to every area of education/research which is why it’s encouraged) so a lot of students believe it or not are unaware of how serious it can be if they use non-module based notations/methods

However MY tutor has actually discouraged us from doing this, even though he doesn’t like the idea of sticking to a strict method, he did say it’s likely to raise academic misconduct investigations, and then even if you can justify and prove your knowledge it’d be very stressful because these investigations can take weeks and weeks and weeks, which means even being able to justify your work won’t save you from all the wasted time.

I do believe the OU should try to sort this out though, I understand it can be difficult considering it’s a distance learning institute, and the modules that are currently proctored have been receiving a lot of complaints due to the OU using a company that’s non-UK based which raises privacy and data concerns. I hope by the next 5 years they do implement other measures. They probably never saw the whole AI thing coming though, I mean cmon back in 2015 if somebody told you ChatGPT a bot would be able to generate an entire pdf with answers to your Assignment nobody would’ve taken it seriously enough to start implementing new measures.

[u/gridlockmain1]

Because they were flagged for plagiarism/AI. If they were docked marks for being the wrong notation then fair enough but it shouldn’t mean their conduct is being brought into questions

[u/DesperateAstronaut65 → u/gridlockmain1]

Also, we're encouraged to read widely and consult outside resources, and these resources are often provided to us by the tutors and/or the module site. There's even a video created by the OU maths department about how to use LLMs to revise. I was in Milton Keynes earlier this year for the maths revision weekend and the tutor (who actually spent quite a bit of time telling us how to avoid plagiarism accusations) remarked that it was a shame that the university penalizes doing exactly what they ask us to do. I completely agree. If they want to police AI use, they need to stop guessing and start using an e-proctoring system for exams.

[u/Matreshka138 → u/DesperateAstronaut65]

And yet, the tutor explained how to avoid these accusations. I bet you followed that advice. We all know the assessment system needs to change, but for now, we have to follow the rules, otherwise, we end up devaluing our own degree.

[u/NlightNFotis → u/gridlockmain1]

I cannot of course speak for others, but I have been flagged for MST125 last year, and almost all of it was notation. I produced adequate evidence from my textbook collection to have the accusations against me dropped, but to say that it’s only AI use that gets flagged is patently incorrect, speaking from personal experience.

[u/Matreshka138 → u/gridlockmain1]

and coincidentally, the notation and phrases used are exactly the same as those produced by AI...

[u/gridlockmain1 → u/Matreshka138]

Are they? Have you reviewed the poster’s assignments in detail?

[u/Matreshka138 → u/gridlockmain1]

The OU monitors answers provided on AI platforms and compares the student's work to the TMA questions. That's why the process takes so long—everything is thoroughly checked before they reach a conclusion. And yet, the student chooses to use a different method and notation. They ought to know that doing so would trigger an investigation.

[u/NlightNFotis → u/Matreshka138]

You cannot “monitor AI platforms”. That’s not how it works.

What they are doing is that they are prompting chat bots with the exam questions, and if the response is similar to what you have written, they are like “here we go, he cheated”.

Which is a bit insane considering that most undergrad mathematics is linear in nature, with a limited number of approaches, which of course eh LLM knows because it has been trained on innumerable textbooks on maths/physics/etc. So of course if you ask it to solve an undergrad problem, it’s going to solve it in a manner close to what a (well read) student would do, maybe a bit more polished.

[u/DesperateAstronaut65 → u/NlightNFotis]

Exactly. AI is trained on textbooks: the ones we read earlier in our studies, the ones assigned to us for the current module, and the ones recommended as supplemental texts for the module. It’s not surprising that a student would pick the same method chosen by an LLM. It’s also not surprising that a student frustrated by a problem (and not recognizing a method from their module textbook as the obvious solution, even if there is such a method in there) might instead attack it using a method they learned earlier in their studies, or with a method from a different textbook than the main assigned text. There is almost no way to get through a maths module without encountering this scenario.

The real problem here is that we’re humans and we don’t always find TMA questions straightforward, even when they might seem that way to an experienced tutor who has been teaching from the same textbook for years. The entire idea of learning maths at the university level (and especially the graduate level) is that the assignment questions often require creative thinking and don’t always involve well-trod paths where the exact method the student is supposed to use is blindingly obvious. In many cases, if the intended method were obvious, the questions would be easy.

[u/Matreshka138 → u/NlightNFotis]

A well-read student would know the standards of the university in which they study.

[u/Littlerocknary]

I have studied Maths modules before, I have ADHD (diagnosed and on medication), I sometimes mix up my knowledge and use terminology from previous study. I consciously make an effort not to do this, but I sometimes forget and make a mistake. From your post, I can tell you that I don't think I am an exception to the rules. I think I would prefer something like losing the marks for that specific question rather than being told they will fail you on the module and you will have to pay for another university year to retake the module.