Re: Extra Credit (was Where Have All the Boys Gone?)

["Bernard G. Cleyet & Nancy Ann Seese" <georgeann@REDSHIFT.COM>]

Thomas O'Neill wrote:

>         I will offer my $2E-02 worth even though my situation is not
> common (i.e., I teach a college course at a regional school for high
> ----------cut

My Sr. E & M course included a take home mid. term.  I found similar, with answers, problems in Joos and another old foreign text.  The high grade I got by "cheating" got me by (a B in course).  When
I turned it in, I told the Prof. that al l the questions I couldn't immediately work, I found hints in Joos and the other book.  He said that that was one of the purposes of the library!



>         So I will ask the question that has always bothered me: Once a
> physicist/chemist/engineer/scientist leaves school, when will he/she/it
> ever take another test?  Because the issue of extra credit and testing
> assumes that testing is a better method of evaluating student mastery of
> the material.  Tests revolve around solving known problems with limited
> resources in a fixed time.  Most professionals that I am aware of, do
> not approach problem-solving with those skills.  Indeed, the first step
> to successful professional problem-solving (What has been done on this
> problem by others?) is called cheating in a test context.

To paraphrase Isaac: We see farther because we ride on the shoulders of many before us.

>         If a person was actually good at test-taking, how does that
> translate into useful professional skills?  I certainly believe that the
> mastery of the material must be demonstrated by the student, but is a
> two-hour exam the best way to do it?  Put it another way, does doing
> well on the Physics AP or Physics SAT II correlate with success in a
> scientific or engineering career?  Should colleges (particularly the
> sciences) move to some other method of evaluation?  Because I figure
> that I am emphasizing testing because my students will encounter it at
> college.
>
>         Note that I do not have answers to these questions and I do use
> timed tests in my class.

My guess is that at the HS  level, tests are necessary for motivation, the reason you give (we are a test taking society) , and "cheating" does not usually promote understanding.  The only practical
alternative (and it's not usually practical) is oral examination.  When I went to HS, exams were not proctored, and often we had take homes.  They were correspondingly much more difficult.  They
produced considerably increased understanding.

bc


> THO
>
>      Thomas O'Neill
> o'neill@csvrgs.k12.va.us
>      Physics
> oneill@csvrgs.k12.va.us
>      C Shenandoah Valley R Governor's School