Subject: [IFETS-DISCUSSION:4431] Re: IFETS-DISCUSSION digest 501
From: P J Radcliffe (pjr@rmit.edu.au)
Date: Thu 27 Feb 2003 - 13:18:24 MET
From: "P J Radcliffe" <pjr@rmit.edu.au> Subject: [IFETS-DISCUSSION:4431] Re: IFETS-DISCUSSION digest 501 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 01:18:24 +1300
Hi Yasmine,
I lecture at RMIT here in Melbourne and I find
multiple choice (MC) a mixed blessing-
* MC are good for testing memory.
* MC are good for simple analysis
- Example : here is bit of program code what
is left in the variable x at the end.
- Example : here is a situation, which method/tool
will most likely solve the problem.
* MC are good at testing comprehension of written
text.
Where multiple choices fail is-
* MC cannot test the ability to express things in writing.
( I see quite a few students who get 70% on MC but
are totally unable to write coherently).
* MC cannot test non-trivial synthesis, analysis, or design.
Given the pressure of higher work loads and reduced mark times (at least
at RMIT) more and more staff are turning to multiple choice. Many exams
are totally multiple choice. Overall I think this has degraded the
quality of the education process and the testing process.
Hope this is of use. I am interested in what you find.
regards PjR
---------------------------------------------------------
List address to send message to everyone:
ifets-discussion@catfish.valdosta.edu
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu 27 Feb 2003 - 13:37:22 MET