一段时间以前，我接到一个教师同行打来的电话。他问我是否愿意当一回裁判，给一名参加考试的学生所答的的题评分。他说那是一道物理题，就那个学生的答案他准备判零分，但那个学生声称自己应该得满分，而且如果现存的制度不是与应该得满分，而且如果现存的制度不是与学生作对的话，他会得满分的。因此教师和学生争执不下，最后同意找一个公正的人来裁决一下，于是选中了我。我来到那个同行的办公室，看了考试题：“借助气压计，表示一下如何能确定一座大楼的高度。”那个学生是这样答的：“把气压计拿到楼顶，系上一根绳子，垂到街面，然后提起绳子，量一量绳子的长度。绳长即是楼高。”

   I pointed out that the student really had a strong ease for full credit, since he had answered the question completely and correctly. On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade for the student in his physics course. A high grade is supposed to certify competence in physics, but the answer did not confirm this. I suggested that the student have another try at answering the question. I was not surprised that my colleague agreed, but I was surprised that the student did.

    我指出那学生确实有足够的理由得满分，因为总是回答得既完整又无误。但话又说回来，如果给他满分，就等于他的物理成绩得了高分，而高分就证明他在物理上能力强，但他的答案无法确定这一点，我建议再给这学生一次机会解答那道题。对此，我的教师同行没有异议，我不觉得奇怪。但那个学生爽快答应，倒使我颇感惊奇。

   I gave student six minutes to answer the question, with the warning that his answer should show some knowledge of physics. At the end of five minutes, he had not written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, but he said no. He had many answers to this problem, he was just thinking of the best one. I excused myself for interrupting him, and asked him to please go on. In the next minute, he dashed off his answer which read:” Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, using the formula A=1/2at, calculate the height ” At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up, He conceded, and I gave the student almost full credit.

    我给他6分钟解题，并提醒说答案应显示出某些物理学知识。5分钟过去了，他只字未写。我问他是否想放弃，他说不。他说答案有很多。他正在考虑哪个是最好的。我对打断他表示歉意，请他继续思考。最后一分钟里，他迅速写下了答案：“把气压计拿到楼顶，倚身楼边，让气压计落下，用秒表计时，然后由公式S=1/2AT²导出楼高。”此时，我问同行是否让步，他同意了。我给了那学生接近满分的成绩。
                                                          （未完待续）