woo hoo! finals are over (again)...
and it was crazy. my income tax I exam was nuts, and I know I missed at least 3 questions.
the problem is that with 30 questions at 3 points each, and you get an additional minus 1 point for wrong answers, I did the math and it turns out that if you answer the 3 questions and get them wrong, you get 78 points. if you didn't answer the questions, you get 81 points. the discrepancy grows as the number of wrong answers increases. For instance, if you answer 10 questions wrong, you get 50 points. But if you didn't answer those 10 questions, you get 60 points.
the worst example of unfairness in this system is where you have student A who answered only 25 questions, but got them all right (5 no answer). This person gets 75 points. But, if student B was in the same position (5 no answer), and decided to take a stab at one of them, but gets it wrong, then this person will end up with 74 points. the discrepancy grows as the number of no answer/make a stab at it decisions increases.
the cutoff is at 26 correct answers -- here, you get 78 points for answering 26 correct questions. If you make a stab at one of the four unanswered questions, if you get it wrong, you are still at 78 points.
but below 26 correct answers, you are a fool to answer them unless you know you are absolutely right. while this may discourage random guessing, it seems to encourage not completing the exam. when it comes to the top few people in the class, the highest grade goes to the person who figures this system out (before the exam). usually, it is a tossup between two potentially correct answers, and in a normal system you have a 50-50 chance of getting the points. But where you are dinged for making the wrong choice, your chances are decreased. it becomes a system of "better no answer" -- which is not what I thought testing was all about.
Problem: we were not warned about this grading policy before the exam. If we had been, we would have had enough time to figure it out and decide our test taking strategies.
and it was crazy. my income tax I exam was nuts, and I know I missed at least 3 questions.
the problem is that with 30 questions at 3 points each, and you get an additional minus 1 point for wrong answers, I did the math and it turns out that if you answer the 3 questions and get them wrong, you get 78 points. if you didn't answer the questions, you get 81 points. the discrepancy grows as the number of wrong answers increases. For instance, if you answer 10 questions wrong, you get 50 points. But if you didn't answer those 10 questions, you get 60 points.
the worst example of unfairness in this system is where you have student A who answered only 25 questions, but got them all right (5 no answer). This person gets 75 points. But, if student B was in the same position (5 no answer), and decided to take a stab at one of them, but gets it wrong, then this person will end up with 74 points. the discrepancy grows as the number of no answer/make a stab at it decisions increases.
the cutoff is at 26 correct answers -- here, you get 78 points for answering 26 correct questions. If you make a stab at one of the four unanswered questions, if you get it wrong, you are still at 78 points.
but below 26 correct answers, you are a fool to answer them unless you know you are absolutely right. while this may discourage random guessing, it seems to encourage not completing the exam. when it comes to the top few people in the class, the highest grade goes to the person who figures this system out (before the exam). usually, it is a tossup between two potentially correct answers, and in a normal system you have a 50-50 chance of getting the points. But where you are dinged for making the wrong choice, your chances are decreased. it becomes a system of "better no answer" -- which is not what I thought testing was all about.
Problem: we were not warned about this grading policy before the exam. If we had been, we would have had enough time to figure it out and decide our test taking strategies.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home