You’re right, I can learn the basics of regex in 30 minutes. Then I can write my one regex. Then I can forget the basics of regex in 3 minutes, because regex’s syntax is random garbage that makes no intuitive sense, and I hate and suck at memorizing nonsense. Repeat every 4-16 months.

It’s true though that regex is entrenched enough that even if something is easier to read, it’s unlikely that it’ll replace regex any time soon. You’d need a couple big names to adopt it, then many years.

But if there’s a readable replacement that can convert to and from regex - well, screw it, I’m in. Even if I’m required to use regex in some program, if I can write something that makes sense without the requisite half hour of googling crap, I’ll just use it as a separate tool to make and read regex strings.

I’d need a lawyer.

Does perfect health last forever? No brainer then. Definitely don’t take the time pauses when you sleep /are unconscious without perfect health though, because then no one could perform surgery on you that requires general anesthesia, which could cause problems.

And arguably, being sleep deprived is not being in perfect health, so if you take perfect health you might not ever need to sleep again anyway, depending on the fine print.

And how precise is the telekinesis? Does it work on things like liquids and gasses? Could you use it to separate liquids and gasses according to type, for instance? If so it’d be more than just fun, it could be quite valuable for sciencey stuff, and you could probably make bank separating out things that are quite hard to isolate. And even if not, you might have a good career in hazardous material handling, and or manipulation of things through clean room windows.

The infinite money trick is also incredibly tempting. Does it work on things like houses and boats? Is it legal? Would you have sufficient proof of its legitimacy that if you, say, pulled a couple hundred grand out of your pocket to buy a house that the sellers would trust that it’s real and above board even if it were?

And so on. Temptation is health and telekinesis, but the various details might cause money to win out over telekinesis.

Maybe natural talent health, but I’d have to plan out what talents to acquire first, as well as information on degree. If with slight work you could become the optimal physicist etc, to the point where you could sit down and just write a perfect theory of everything that matched all our observations on paper, then that would of course be awesome. But if it doesn’t come with essentially super skills - well, I’m pretty ok with what I can do/how well I can learn now, and telekinesis sounds fun.

Once Kawakami and Hatsumi have passed away, ninjas will forever cease to exist.

That’s what they want you to think.

Getting points is not a reward for a right answer. It’s a consequence of a right answer. There is no judgement or personal opinion or generosity involved. Right answer implies points. Anything else is dishonest.

Answering the question as written is not playing language games. It is answering the question. If your question allows answers that don’t demonstrate what you want, then that means that you suck at language, not that your student is playing games. If the student is playing games as well, well students are allowed to have fun, and the screw up is still yours.

The language is very clear and the answers absolutely meet the requirement. The teacher does not get to withhold points because they’re embarrassed that they wrote a crappy question.

It’s not rewarding. It’s assigning points based on the completion of the task. This is math, it does not have to be warm and fuzzy touchy feely nonsense with room for interpretation. If you can’t write clear instructions for a math problem, that is on you. If you cannot communicate your expectations to your students, that is on you. This problem would be incredibly easy to redo so that this answer was not allowed.

Ask the question you want the answer to. If you can’t think of a good way to ask your question to get the answer you want, ask of a different question covering the same concepts. If you can’t do that, then maybe you shouldn’t be writing math exams.

Yeah, sure, it’s for a kid. But even for kids - especially, in fact - it’s important to stick by what you say. And that test question says “write a number with a 3 in the 10s place” or whatever, which they did.

Basic use of language is fine. When you’re teaching you define what it means to “solve” or “provide the answer to” 1 1 = _. For a young kid, this is through examples, and later on it might be with an explicit written definition.

And then the question says “solve the following”, which does not mean “write any true statement”, and so excludes 1 1 = 1 1 as a correct answer.

Yeah sure, the kid is probably being a smart ass in this case. So? It’s ok for a kid to pull one over on you occasionally. Do better with the language next time, and it won’t happen again.

Exam questions should be designed so that answers (that follow any instructions) demonstrate understanding. If they are not, that’s the exam’s fault, not the student’s, and so should have no impact on the grade.

In this case, the exam could verify understanding by either asking additional questions (in the number 123, what digit is in the tens place), and/or by modifying the existing questions to require circling the correct place or not using the specified number outside that place. But regardless, if an answer is correct, then it is correct.

I’d agree that it’s perfectly fine for a teacher to follow up with the student to make sure they know what they were expected to know. But they should not make the exam score itself dependent on the follow up.

The exam is over, the questions and answers were what they were, the student should not have to worry that they will have to continually resit exams as teachers decide that they didn’t like the questions that they asked.