In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Robert J. MacG. Dawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>dennis roberts wrote:
>> At 09:34 AM 2/6/2003, Robert J. MacG. Dawson wrote:
>> > I'm afraid I don't see the rationale for this. An examination has
>> >little value *except* as a way of setting grades;
>> robert, do you really mean this? i think the major benefit of any exam/test
>> ... is providing some feedback to the student about how he/she is getting
>> on with the material ...
> This is done in a far more timely fashion (hence far better) by weekly
>quizzes and assignments than by exams. By the time of an exam, the
>material has been covered and usually won't be again. "Wer jetzt kein
>Haus hat, baut sich keines mehr" ("Who now has no house will not build
>one"), as Rilke wrote on a completely different subject.
If anything, we examine on too little material at one time.
To use the house analogy, the quizzes and assignments are
on the placement of material in a room by an interior
decorator, or using nails to put up a wall.
We really should examine our students on lots of material
at one time, not on tiny parts. The important part is to
be able to use what is learned in unforeseen situations,
not to memorize or carry out routine steps.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
. http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ .
=================================================================
