The question is: what does an exam measure better: the aptitude or hard work of the student, or the creative effectiveness of the teacher?
I experienced this question firsthand one year. I taught a branch of math in the way I (remembered being) taught to a class of students who were not receptive to that approach. When I tested them, I was very disappointed.
After a few weeks of mulling, I went back to that branch with some new ideas about how to approach the topic. This time with a graphic rather than an abstract approach. More grounded in their likely life experiences. Almost immediately I started hearing "oh, now I get it!" and "well that's easy". Same test, but -much- better results. It wasn't their fault. What they taught me was invaluable.
Yes, exams measure the effectiveness of teacher presentations as much as they measure what students have learned. Good teaching is not a part-time job ... many students are ill-served by this approach. A person who resents teaching as a part-time burden is unlikely to shine at it. And students sense it.
Nor is good teaching a gift from the divine - any more than great lab technique, or crisp programming. Many teachers don't recite the same notes year-after-year, because they're 'good enough'. Their exam results help them to learn from their mistakes.
If the exams don't measure teacher effectiveness as well, then what does? What their paying students walk away with. Is it a treasure, or a wheelbarrow of dirt?
1 Jy = 10-23 erg s-1 cm-2 Hz-1 (cgs)
only their figure: L9.9 GHz < 2.1 × 10^25 erg s−1 Hz−1
leaves out the cm-2. (So not a density, like Jy. Perhaps 'L' is luminosity? ... As in: "The solar luminosity unit is a measure of the Sun's radiant energy and is equal to 3.828×10^(26) Watts." -(NRAO)
While groping, I found this helpful page called Brightness in Radio Astronomy: http://physics.wku.edu/~gibson/radio/brightness.html
Edit: Unless the one time pad is a well known relative document, such as the Declaration of Independence.
Starting with the n-char plaintext, make it a loop. Now move the second letter two places to its right, the third three places, and so on ... until arriving at the original nth letter (painted red?) Or, starting with the digits of pi, move the second letter 3 to the right, the third 1, the fourth 4, und so weiter.
Doing a frequency on 97 weird letters wouldn't help much.
IIRC, that's about how long Google+ lasted, after they locked my access to the blog I'd been writing for four years ... until I gave them my real name.
<b>Moral of story</b>: With Google, it's always something.