3 ms·

They can but: - it's more time-consuming to create good evaluation questions. - it's more time-consuming to provide a nuanced answer. - it's more time-consum

by gjadi 4y ago

They can but: - it's more time-consuming to create good evaluation questions. - it's more time-consuming to provide a nuanced answer. - it's more time-consuming to evaluate nuanced answers. If the purpose of the tests is to help students retain the knowledge they've been recently exposed to, then the first kind of tests are more effective. That is, the teacher will be able to provide students with more tests, thus helping them retain more in a shorter amount of time for everyone. It's a compromise.

jolmg 4y ago
Ok, you're thinking type 1 vs type 2 is multiple choice vs written answers. I'm thinking type 2 can have multiple choice, but then there's only 1 answer that can be correct. Type 1 can have multiple choice, but puts multiple correct answers and expects you to pick the one that is most directly covered in the class, marking the other correct answers incorrect. That, to me, is testing information retention without nuanced knowledge.
- gjadi 4y ago
  On the first part of your post: We don't have the full test, so maybe the teacher had a preface saying "In the context of book XYZ...". That is what I do when I create flashcards for myself. I specify what knowledge I am testing. We may also assume it was implicit for the students. I could also imagine that forcing the student to make one choice is a feature, not bug. For example this decision may teach the student that (1) not everything is binary and a single book has no absolute truth, (2) to move forward, you need to make a choice. Regarding the second part: > That, to me, is testing information without knowledge. Memorization vs. Understanding is a false dichotomy. Both are required for proper learning. See https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn.
  - jolmg 4y ago
    > Memorization vs. Understanding is a false dichotomy. Hey, you're flipping us around. Who was it that wrote this?: > IMO they are two kinds of tests: I'm the one that's arguing that it's a false dichotomy, that tests need to cover both and not one without the other. > I could also imagine that forcing the student to make one choice is a feature, not bug. For example this decision may teach the student that (1) not everything is binary and a single book has no absolute truth By writing a test that forces non-binary things to appear binary and presents the book as an absolute truth? That's going to teach them the opposite? > (2) to move forward, you need to make a choice. You're grasping at straws with this. You're telling me that marking correct answers incorrect is good because it teaches a life lesson?
    - gjadi 4y ago
      Yes, rereading the thread, I think I'm going too far. My main and original point is the following: tests that only test memorization are good on their own ("Tests to help you retain information."). You need both memorization and understanding to learn. Yes, some tests can improve both; but focusing on only one aspect - here memorization - is fine too.
      - jolmg 4y ago
        Yeah, to circle back, as I understood you, type 2 do both, type 1 only memorization, and I called type 1 bad, because, like the question of this post, they can punish understanding. You say that's fine; I still say it's bad, but I guess it's just a difference of standards.
        gjadi 4y ago
        Yes, thank you for the discussion!
      - mrparrot 4y ago
        Testing information retention is fine. But the information "The textbook claims A is the correct answer" is not worth remembering, is it?
        gjadi 4y ago
        It is not critical but I think it is interesting. For example, I've read Code Complete 2, and while browsing online I found that some of the claims in the book was not solid. - https://www.sicpers.info/2012/09/an-apology-to-readers-of-test-driven-ios-development/ https://www.sicpers.info/2012/09/an-apology-to-readers-of-te... - https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4ACmfJkXQxkYacdLt/diseased-disciplines-the-strange-case-of-the-inverted-chart https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4ACmfJkXQxkYacdLt/diseased-d... The point made in the above links are interesting but, because I remember reading this particular book, they are sticking more deeply in me. Also it probably depends heavily on the topic. For example in economic or philosophy, there are different schools of thoughts and I think it is valuable to know from which school a "fact" is attached to. And before learning about every school, it is probably easier to just remember where you first read it. This is not critical, but maybe having this information can help you create new insights.

by gjadi 4y ago

jolmg 4y ago

Ok, you're thinking type 1 vs type 2 is multiple choice vs written answers. I'm thinking type 2 can have multiple choice, but then there's only 1 answer that can be correct. Type 1 can have multiple choice, but puts multiple correct answers and expects you to pick the one that is most directly covered in the class, marking the other correct answers incorrect. That, to me, is testing information retention without nuanced knowledge.

gjadi 4y ago
On the first part of your post: We don't have the full test, so maybe the teacher had a preface saying "In the context of book XYZ...". That is what I do when I create flashcards for myself. I specify what knowledge I am testing. We may also assume it was implicit for the students. I could also imagine that forcing the student to make one choice is a feature, not bug. For example this decision may teach the student that (1) not everything is binary and a single book has no absolute truth, (2) to move forward, you need to make a choice. Regarding the second part: > That, to me, is testing information without knowledge. Memorization vs. Understanding is a false dichotomy. Both are required for proper learning. See https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn.
- jolmg 4y ago
  > Memorization vs. Understanding is a false dichotomy. Hey, you're flipping us around. Who was it that wrote this?: > IMO they are two kinds of tests: I'm the one that's arguing that it's a false dichotomy, that tests need to cover both and not one without the other. > I could also imagine that forcing the student to make one choice is a feature, not bug. For example this decision may teach the student that (1) not everything is binary and a single book has no absolute truth By writing a test that forces non-binary things to appear binary and presents the book as an absolute truth? That's going to teach them the opposite? > (2) to move forward, you need to make a choice. You're grasping at straws with this. You're telling me that marking correct answers incorrect is good because it teaches a life lesson?
  - gjadi 4y ago
    Yes, rereading the thread, I think I'm going too far. My main and original point is the following: tests that only test memorization are good on their own ("Tests to help you retain information."). You need both memorization and understanding to learn. Yes, some tests can improve both; but focusing on only one aspect - here memorization - is fine too.
    - jolmg 4y ago
      Yeah, to circle back, as I understood you, type 2 do both, type 1 only memorization, and I called type 1 bad, because, like the question of this post, they can punish understanding. You say that's fine; I still say it's bad, but I guess it's just a difference of standards.
      - gjadi 4y ago
        Yes, thank you for the discussion!
    - mrparrot 4y ago
      Testing information retention is fine. But the information "The textbook claims A is the correct answer" is not worth remembering, is it?
      - gjadi 4y ago
        It is not critical but I think it is interesting. For example, I've read Code Complete 2, and while browsing online I found that some of the claims in the book was not solid. - https://www.sicpers.info/2012/09/an-apology-to-readers-of-test-driven-ios-development/ https://www.sicpers.info/2012/09/an-apology-to-readers-of-te... - https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4ACmfJkXQxkYacdLt/diseased-disciplines-the-strange-case-of-the-inverted-chart https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4ACmfJkXQxkYacdLt/diseased-d... The point made in the above links are interesting but, because I remember reading this particular book, they are sticking more deeply in me. Also it probably depends heavily on the topic. For example in economic or philosophy, there are different schools of thoughts and I think it is valuable to know from which school a "fact" is attached to. And before learning about every school, it is probably easier to just remember where you first read it. This is not critical, but maybe having this information can help you create new insights.