IMO, I just see it as a memorization method. Now, I do understand that students can still learn the content through tests, but the classic excuses still arise:
What if I'm just not a "good" test taker?
What if I did study, but my score didn't reflect it?
He/she barely studies and still ends up with an A or B in the class?
I’m not sure about your opinion, but if you really think about it, imagine if schools and colleges started doing more “hands on” work, like single/group projects/activities, papers, and presentations rather than testing students? They can also teach you stuff about how to live a responsible and successful life that some schools never teach you.
Now, the real world is a more “hands on” approach to life. Yes, you still have to have common sense, but are tests really helping or hurting? It’s honestly not that hard to teach a class without testing. I also know a few classes that I’ve taken before that would’ve been better without any unnecessary testing. Furthermore, I understand that testing is still helpful for some classes, but not all of them.
First, in college and beyond, tests involve far more than memorization such as comparisons, discrimination, applications, and other advanced cognitive skills. For example, virtually, anything from easiest to most difficult content can be tested using a multiple choice format. Memorization of terms and broader concepts and theories is too complex. Depending on memorization is like working on a jig saw puzzle with lots of missing pieces. If you are depending on memorization to prepare for a test you are limited in what you learn and may account for your experience as a poor test taker.
You may study, but your strategy is dependent on memoring your time studing may actually reduce the amount learned. There are some test takers who routinely earn A and B grades that you assume are spending less time studying than you. These students may listen in class and take excellent notes, read the textbook and handouts and think about what they are learning and how that information relates to what they already do or practice. Students may rehease what they have learned, related new to learn older content, compare ideas/theories, specifically learn vocabulary and how it applies, read chapter summaries and add mising information, answer questions in text, review graphs and charts. These things are neither difficult nor time consuming. Instead, these strategies are active and engage the mind. Learning is faster and more comprehensive.
Group work is very helpful when a project or concept is involved, but may or may not have a hands on component. Groups are made up of individuals whose contribution vary by quality and amount. How many classes have you personal!y taught without testing and an evaluative component? Testing is valuable in measuring student learning and which areas need more study. It is helpful to the student to know how well content is mastered. Further, testing tells the teacher how well students mastered content, especially what needs further review.
If your approach to the ACT or SAT is memorizing, you are in trouble. These tests evaluate mastery of the curriculum in high school without guidance about what will be tested on a particular version. The test items range from very easy so most students mark the correct response to questions so difficult that very few answer correctly. A large share of items range from pretty easy to pretty difficult. Some test items started out as memorization such what happened in 1066, but learning nvolves knowing the answer right away and then finding the correct response and marking it on the scantron. The more information that has moved from memorized to known speeds up the accuracy and reduces the time necessary to think through potential responses.
“I’m not sure about your opinion, but if you really think about it, imagine if schools and colleges started doing more “hands on” work, like …group projects/activities…”"
Yeah, no, hands on work doesn’t work for everything, and I say this as a CS major. I absolutely HATE group projects as they do not accurately reflect the knowledge and effort of individuals. And a good test/assessment does not merely test memorization. You need to understand things and be able to apply them. For example, my real analysis class was really hard. If you just memorized all the proofs and theorems, you would have failed the class. On the test, you needed to be able to apply the theorems and use them to create complete and concise proofs of statements. Doing so is really difficult and you would lose points for things that were not absolutely perfect- I never got above a 68 on an exam and I got an A- in the class. I also grade a math course for CS majors and the questions on their HWs (and exams) require thought. There is not always a single correct answer and, I as the grader, must be able to follow their logic in order to determine how well they understand the concepts, and assign points accordingly.
Some people don’t learn something if they don’t have an incentive to learn it (like needing a good grade on the exam). And group projects aren’t an incentive as long as you can sponge off of any more dedicated group members.
I don’t want a doctor who cannot prove he knows his stuff. Or an accountant. Or a lawyer. Or a teacher. Or a pharmacist. Or an engineer… you get my drift.
It’s not always about benefiting the student. It’s about earning a degree that actually stands for something.
And, for what it’s worth, I gave a Precalc Test a few weeks ago and let them bring in an index card with the formulas on it. I still had failures. It all tests are simple regurgitation.
Yes, as #5 says, the tests are for the credentialing aspect of school. Schools exist both to educate and to tell others that someone is educated.
If you are interested in the education but do not need the credential, then many subjects can be learned on your own if you sufficient interest and motivation.
I’d rather have the midterms and final exams than group projects. I figure for the exams you only have yourself to depend on and the grade you get is the one you’ve earned yourself. With group projects you get the grade your group gets which is unfair when you have group members who do nothing for the project and do not deserve the grade.
That said, I absolutely loathe group projects and I go out of my way to avoid them at all costs.
Just learn to study better and the exams will be easier. That’s the key.
Multiple choice tests are easy to grade. In a very large class, sometimes other things are not feasible. And besides, they have to weed students out somehow.
WPI students take quizzes and exams and do homework, just like every other college. If a class has a project, it is in addition to, not in place of, exams.
Struggling with test-taking can be a result of anxiety. But, it can also indicate a lack of preparation. In college, test are much more about understanding the material and applying concepts, as opposed to straight memorization.
When WPI was developing their project based program (which does involve a lot of classroom testing) they also had a a degree requirement called the “competency exam.” At breaks between the seven week terms, the seniors had to pass an OPEN BOOK, written design problem in their major. While no other classes were going on, they were given a real design problem in their field, complete with irrelevant as well as relevant information. Students had two days to design the solution. They handed in their paper to three faculty who took a day to review the student’s solution. On the fourth or fifth day the student would give a presentation of their design to the faculty committee…
The faculty learned that a good number of classroom/exam students could function much better in the classic classroom/lecture setting than they could on a full, poorly delineated, real world design problem. It became apparent that an “A” in the classroom did not always translate to an “A” in a real world, open book, design problem. Memorization is a helpful tool, but creative design solutions are much more difficult to develop. When WPI says “hands on,” they are referring to the design solutions to real world problems. This may or may not involve the direct use of machinery. This was all done for a BS degree! These problems were at a level which requires students to delineate workable solutions in an environment rich with a variety of approaches. Not all approaches work. This is a higher level of cognitive activity which is not readily designed into a written exam.
True, not all students put in the same effort on projects. There are other forces at work in projects:
1. Peer pressure increases in a professional environment (this is the real world in corporate environments);
2. Designs today often require teamwork, this is a developed skill for many;
3. Students may actually find out that they are not the only ones with good ideas;
4. Presentation skills and confidence are improved.
Like any good company, surround yourself with motivated peers and you will get results.
Real projects are the capstones to the classroom/lecture/exam process.