It was considerably harder than the previous exams. I would like to know how these lecturers know whether a student will be able to complete the exam in time or not. I wonder if it is possible to force them to show us the averages from last semester to this semester and for instance how many students were able to complete the formal proofs. Last semester at least they made sure that you would be able to complete the first formal proof and get at least some marks for the second proof, this semester it appears as if they purposefully tried to prevent students from completing it. I was able to do the first one, but no luck with the second one. I am getting a bit gatvol of this treatment we are getting.
I don't really get the point in learning all these cool formal techniques and elimination rules for several months,
only to be given 2 questions which are insanely difficult to answer. (Add sarcasm as necessary)
The exam didn't truly test a student on his knowledge or ability to apply what they have learnt.
I feel really disappointed. I really enjoyed doing this course and the assignments.
But the exam was really unfitting.There are so many cool ways to test the syllabus and Tarski's world stuff.
This is just my opinion.
(and i doubt they will release stats)