David Wasieleski wrote:
> Finally, to anticipate the questions of some list members
> (and you know who you are), I actually believe that as much as possible,
> students should not be overly burdened by time contraints on exams, and
noise
> issues, etc. That is, exams and assignments should be given in an
atmosphere
> that maximizes the students' chances of giving their optimal performance.
I'm fairly certain that I agree with you on this in practice, but I
would have worded it differently. It seems to me that the goal isn't to
"maximize students' chances of giving their optimal performance", but rather
to provide circumstances that give the best opportunity for students to
demonstrate what they do _and do not_ know (and what they are and are not
able to do). In other words, if exams and assignments are to have diagnostic
power, they have to provide opportunity for failure where that is the
expected outcome for a particular student in light of that student's
knowledge/ability.
In practice, my exams probably look quite a bit like yours. Almost
everything I require in my classes is open-book/open-note/takehome, and
involves integrating responses into reports and papers (as opposed to simply
figuring equations and giving short answers). I also generally allow
students to revise work, which leaves me having to make subjective judgments
about the degree to which the revised work reflects independent
understanding (as opposed to simply responding to my feedback in such a way
that I was really the one providing the answer). I don't believe that my
subjective judgments of a student's ability are or should be irrelevant to
that student's progress in my course and in the program, so this doesn't
really bother me (though of course it bothers some of the students who fail
my courses...!).
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
