3 ms·

If the test accurately reflects the course material, is there a difference?

by bradly 16y ago

yanowitz 16y ago
The problem is (at least) three-fold. One: The tail wags the dog. Since No Child Left Behind, schools have had one major metric: test scores. They have now geared everything else towards making test scores improve, from curriculum to teaching how to take a test. So the test drives all. Two: Tests are not necessarily a great way to assess mastery of material. The fact that teaching test-taking strategies can dramatically improve scores (independent of underlying domain knowledge) is one example of testing's weaknesses. Three: Tests are not a good way to construct ideal curriculum. They, of necessity, have to be far more limited in scope than what we (should) want to educate people on.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  The fact that teaching test-taking strategies can dramatically improve scores (independent of underlying domain knowledge) is one example of testing's weaknesses. If you give this training to everyone (note: it doesn't take that much time), everyone receives the dramatic improvement due to test-strategy education, and test scores become comparable again. Tests [...], of necessity, have to be far more limited in scope than what we (should) want to educate people on. Please explain. Is the concern simply that tests are only a statistically representative sampling of things the student should know, rather than the actual knowledge? That's true. Similarly, a map of America isn't actually America. Doesn't mean it isn't useful.
  - madcaptenor 16y ago
    It's not just a sampling, though. Tests have to be constructed to fit within a single class period -- usually an hour or an hour and a half -- and as a result you can't really ask students to do any single problem that would take more than maybe twenty minutes. Unfortunately, most things in life take longer than twenty minutes.
bryanlarsen 16y ago
The problem is the same as this Dilbert cartoon: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-11-13/ http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-11-13/ When metrics/scores/grades matter, they become much less useful. Grades are harder to game than the Dilbert cartoon -- learning the material is still one of the best ways to increase your score. But once grades matter to teachers and schools as well, the opportunities for gaming increase substantially. If the cure's worse than the disease, we could bring back the curve. I don't think it's gone that far yet, though...

If the test accurately reflects the course material, is there a difference?

by bradly 16y ago

If the test accurately reflects the course material, is there a difference?

The problem is (at least) three-fold. One: The tail wags the dog. Since No Child Left Behind, schools have had one major metric: test scores. They have now geared everything else towards making test scores improve, from curriculum to teaching how to take a test. So the test drives all. Two: Tests are not necessarily a great way to assess mastery of material. The fact that teaching test-taking strategies can dramatically improve scores (independent of underlying domain knowledge) is one example of testing's weaknesses. Three: Tests are not a good way to construct ideal curriculum. They, of necessity, have to be far more limited in scope than what we (should) want to educate people on.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
The fact that teaching test-taking strategies can dramatically improve scores (independent of underlying domain knowledge) is one example of testing's weaknesses. If you give this training to everyone (note: it doesn't take that much time), everyone receives the dramatic improvement due to test-strategy education, and test scores become comparable again. Tests [...], of necessity, have to be far more limited in scope than what we (should) want to educate people on. Please explain. Is the concern simply that tests are only a statistically representative sampling of things the student should know, rather than the actual knowledge? That's true. Similarly, a map of America isn't actually America. Doesn't mean it isn't useful.
- madcaptenor 16y ago
  It's not just a sampling, though. Tests have to be constructed to fit within a single class period -- usually an hour or an hour and a half -- and as a result you can't really ask students to do any single problem that would take more than maybe twenty minutes. Unfortunately, most things in life take longer than twenty minutes.

bryanlarsen 16y ago

The problem is the same as this Dilbert cartoon: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-11-13/ http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-11-13/ When metrics/scores/grades matter, they become much less useful. Grades are harder to game than the Dilbert cartoon -- learning the material is still one of the best ways to increase your score. But once grades matter to teachers and schools as well, the opportunities for gaming increase substantially. If the cure's worse than the disease, we could bring back the curve. I don't think it's gone that far yet, though...