Tag Archives: Testing

Multiple choice questions are deceptively difficult.

Posted on by
Reply

I am convinced that if given the choice, people will choose to do a multiple choice question over a fill-in-the-blank/short answer question which asks the same thing.  Reasoning could be explained that they have a better chance of getting the answer correct by having the correct answer in front of them (most of which having a 1 in 4 chance of picking the correct answer).  However, people tend to forget that many teachers (especially math) can give partial credit if work is shown  with a short answer question, particularly if some conceptual knowledge is displayed.  This cannot be done with multiple choice questions.

Many standardized tests can use this theory to their advantage, and can in turn become tricky with their multiple choice options.  In my opinion, the authors of the Integrated Algebra Regents exam are most comparable to the New England Patriots – they seek out your weaknesses and then drill them all day long.  The authors of the Integrated Algebra Regents know what students have difficulty with, and what mistakes are commonly made.  They will work out the problem using these common mistakes and make that an answer choice, causing the majority of students that make that common mistake to pick the wrong answer.  A good student will not make those mistakes in the first place.   A great student will recognize these tricks and use the process of elimination to help them ensure they have the correct answer, or at least a better chance of getting the right answer.

The Regents exams (math, at least) are complex exams.  They not only focus on the content being tested, but on how well a student performs on tests.  With the complexity of these exams, and the stress of performance effecting teacher evaluations, how can we blame teachers for teaching to the test?  Yes, ideally, if content is focused on, the students should be able to demonstrate their mastery by content knowledge alone.  However, if no instruction or preparation is given to show the students the nature of these tests beforehand, even the most competent student could fall into the trap of making common mistakes and choosing the wrong answer.

 

The Elephant in the Room is sitting on my chest…

Posted on by
1

This morning, we had our monthly faculty meeting.  We discussed important dates and events that will happen in the final push of the year – 37 instructional days left!  I can’t believe it.

Then the tone got heavy.  We talked about all the state mandated changes to happen before September.  Let me preface this by saying any one of these changes is a major undertaking in itself, and each seems (in its ideology) like a great thing to be doing, but we have 6.  Yup, six.  And about 2 months to learn how to do each one correctly and start implementing them.  And, oh yeah, teach your content as well.  And, each of these changes comes with their own set of terminology and acronyms that we must now understand upon hearing.  As each one of these six new state mandates went on the board, my head spun a bit more, and I sunk lower in my chair, and I started thinking just how good North Carolina was looking right about now…

1. Benchmark Testing – These tests will take place every 6 weeks.  They are not the typical tests that you already give to your students (we wouldn’t want to make this easy on you).  These tests, ideally, will help teachers to know what needs to be retaught and what students really aren’t getting the content.  Again, this is somehow different from what teachers already do…don’t ask me how.

2. Student Learning Objectives (SLO’s) – Many mixed messages about what these actually are and their purpose.  I thought I understood it, and then they changed the wording again.  It seemed to me that they were a way for non-regents teachers to be evaluated on student performance as part of the APPR.  However, now Regents teachers are also included in this in some way, which is the part that doesn’t make sense to me.  Regents teachers will now be evaluated on how their students perform on the Regents, and meeting these objectives (that they also have to create, by the way).

3. Data Driven Instruction (DDI) – Theoretically, this makes perfect sense.  You change what you are teaching based on the percentage of students not understanding material.  Where it starts not making sense is how this is different from Benchmark Testing (which I still can’t figure out how that’s different from what we do already…more paperwork maybe?)

4. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) – This basically states that all content areas need to include literacy.  Each teacher must create 2 units (1 each semester) in which literacy is embedded and an integral part of their unit, no matter the content area.  Again, don’t ask me how this is different from what we already do…probably paperwork again.

5. Dignity for All Students Act (DASA) – An important thing to happen; unfortunately it may be eclipsed by the 4 preceding changes.  This act makes punishment more severe for bullies and hopes to cut down on the bullying problems that seem to be plaguing our society.  However, this too has it’s own separate training and procedures, that take more time and energy away from planning and implementing lessons.  I believe that this is a valued change, and will eventually be as routine as training for sexual harassment, blood borne pathogens, and CPS reporting.  But starting it now, the timing just seems to stink.

6. Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) – This has been a huge hot-topic for our state over the past year.  It encompasses the first 3 changes on this list, and then some.  I won’t even get too much into this one because it’s so up-in-the-air and no one (anywhere) can seem to figure out what is expected of us at the state level, nor agree on how this should be set-up.

Like I said, all of these are theoretically important and necessary changes to the education process.  Theoretically, they will make us greater teachers, and therefore our students will benefit more from that.  However, because all these changes are happening at the same time, they’ll be lucky if there are any teachers left in New York State crazy enough to pull it off.

Do you remember when you were a kid and you thought it was strange to see your teacher outside of school because you just didn’t picture them having a life outside of school?  Now it will be even more rare an occasion.

Bingo Review Game

Posted on by
Reply

This week, I had 2 students in my room that needed to review for a Living Environment Evolution test.  I got a list of questions (with answers) from their teacher, and was told they were using them in a review game for the class.  Well, since I just had the 2 of them, I modified my review.  I told them to each make bingo boards with the answers of the questions.  There were 24 questions, and we made 5 by 5 squares with a free space in the middle.  They spent time writing in the answers anywhere on their board.  When they were done, I read off the question and they had to mark the answer on their board.  Now, since this was review, I had them tell me what they thought the answer was, so that they weren’t studying the wrong one.  I corrected them immediately (if needed) and continued with the next question.  They were allowed to switch their marker to the correct answer, but if I do this again next time, I may penalize them in some way so that they cannot just mark the right answer after getting it wrong.  Possibly, by marking incorrect answers with another color chip so that the space is dead and they need to make bingo in another way.  This will encourage students to make more educated guesses on their bingo answers.  I think this could work very well in any content area, and with any size group of people.

Active Learners for the Future

Posted on by
Reply

I am a firm believer that students need to be actively engaged to learn.  The best teachers, and by far the most memorable lessons, incorporate active involvement in the classroom.  My favorite math teacher in high school taught us about locus points by taking us outside and rearranging us as locus points, situating us around stationary objects such as trees and sidewalks.  My second favorite math teacher taught us pre-calculus by encouraging us to explore various graphs to come up with rules for graphing them, and provided limited guidance in this process.  It was maddening, but I better learned how various types of graphs match up with their equations.

Nay-sayers to this method of teaching claim that teachers are being lazy, making the students do all the work.  I believe it’s quite the contrary.  Teachers have to take a lot of time and effort to plan a lesson that students will run themselves.  Teachers have to anticipate every direction that the lesson may go in.  Teachers have to remain astute to the conversations and actions around the classroom as an active lesson is being implemented, to make sure the students are staying focused to the task at hand.  People that oppose this method may also claim that with time constraints, material needs to be covered before state tests, and that active learning takes more time to implement.  While that may be true, wouldn’t it be better to have students learn the content better than try to race through content only touching on brief aspects?  Wouldn’t you get more out of your students with active learning because students would want to come to class and to stay attentive while there?

The alternative to active learning creates passive learners.  These are the types of learners that sit in class soaking up knowledge, just to squeeze it back onto an assessment and maybe, if they are lucky, to retain it.  These are the learners that never truly learn how to learn, or to do anything independently.  When they leave high school, they are lost in a sea of other passive learners, and do not know how to actively solve problems, or even how to find problems to solve.  When we create passive learners, we are setting them up for failure.

I believe that it is active learning that inspires students to continue learning.  I believe that it is active learning that causes students to continue to ask questions, and creates a spark for their passion of wanting to know more.  Active learners possess intrinsic motivation, the highest and most effective means of motivation, and the hardest for a teacher to cultivate.  However, once an active learner has been created, they are unstoppable, always looking for the answers to life’s questions, and always coming up with new questions to ask.  Why would we not want to have active learners in our society, in our future, and more importantly, in our classrooms?

Test Taking

Posted on by
Reply

It’s that time of year to start thinking about these things. The NYS tests are looming around us, and my kids have never used a bubble sheet before! Take 5 minutes out of your day in the beginning to teach them early on how to use a bubble sheet. Start using bubble sheets for other multiple choice tests so that they can practice and get the hang of it. Remember to give them tips: make sure to bubble all the way; make sure to erase all the way; make sure your answers match up with the answers in your booklet; make sure you didn’t skip any numbers; etc.

Taking it slow, and constant reminders, can go a long way in making sure they don’t practice bad habits!