I have an idea. Every class meeting is nothing but exam and assessment from
start to finish. More must be better, right?
More seriously: do we know the optimum ratio of testing to learning objectives
covered? At what point are there diminishing returns?
Paul
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 21,
What is so funny about how Canadians pronounce those two words?Are they similar to Australian creole?michael
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here:
Michael:
Be mindful of incorrect stereotypes based on media characterizations.
Have you personally ever heard a Canadian pronounce these words
differently than you would?
Along these lines, most fellow Canadians to whom I have spoken have
said that last weekend's Saturday Night Live sketch (
I am a fan of more frequent testing, but what do folks think about the authors'
contortions and post hoc fishing to find that their daily quiz class was
comparatively better? If regular testing and retesting is effective, it ought
to be easier to show greater comprehension and mastery of the
Speaking about bad accents, remember Paul McCartney's Dakota accent in Rocky Racoon? He couldn't keep it after second :30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNRH7_Kd5Ycbtw I ran "capital of Canada" past my kids and they of course knew it .. they were
I used a PSI system (self-paced unit mastery) for many (~40) years.
Since there was no final exam I couldn't assess comprehension and mastery that
way (and then there's the question of whether a MC question can assess complex
cognitive behavior anyway).
I did have another alternative, however.
The difference between the way (some) Canadians pronounce these words and the
way(s)Americans do is greatly exaggerated.
Chris
-
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M6C 1G4
Canada
chri...@yorku.ca
On Nov 22, 2013, at 10:14 AM, msylves...@copper.net
I'm thinking: recent effect. If you only test what you taught today, but not
what you taught six or twelve weeks ago, of course you'll get better results.
Chris
-
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M6C 1G4
Canada
chri...@yorku.ca
On Nov 22, 2013, at
But are you testing what you taught several weeks ago, or what students crammed
the night before from the text and their lecture notes.
On Nov 22, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Christopher Green wrote:
I'm thinking: recent effect. If you only test what you taught today, but not
what you taught six or
Hi
A few years ago I reviewed some of the literature related to blocked
instruction (taking fewer courses over shorter periods of time) and there were
indeed suggestions that people might fare better on immediate tests of
knowledge but not so on delayed (e.g., performance in following
Part of what's interesting is they are testing before class starts, and there
is always at least one question from weeks previous. I think that's a good
approach.
The first 10-minutes of each class were devoted to an 8-item daily quiz.
Seven of the questions covered material from the previous
There are a lot of interesting statements in this paper. I love this one:
The purpose of the curve was to reduce the number of students who failed the
first exams – a standard practice in American universities.
Standard practice? Common practice, certainly, but far from standard. And,
methods
Stats mavens--
How many students do you need to justify the assumption of a normal (or other)
distribution of measures of performance?
On Nov 22, 2013, at 12:34 PM, Paul C Bernhardt wrote:
There are a lot of interesting statements in this paper. I love this one:
The purpose of the curve
Dear Tipsters,
Given that the issue of multiple-choice and short-answer questions has come up
in this thread, you may be interested in this paper:
Ozuru et al. (2013). Comparing comprehension measured by MC and open-ended
questions. Can. J. Exp. Psy., 67, 215-227.
The authors argue that the
Paul Brandon asked for stats mavens to address his inquiry: How many students
do you need to justify the assumption of a normal (or other) distribution of
measures of performance?
--
If you know any mavens, you may suspect that they will not have a simple answer
for him.
Hi
As Rick points out, the number of students is largely irrelevant to whether you
get a normal distribution, unless you know (think) you're sampling from a
normal distribution to begin with.
Where number of observations comes into play is if you are calculating a sum or
average of the
Hi
Like Paul when students score too poorly on a test, I will scale scores like
this: newscore = .xx*(100-oldscore), where .xx is some proportion to give the
overall increment I've decided is appropriate. My reasoning is overly
challenging test will hurt poorer students more and, by
17 matches
Mail list logo
