Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!unido!rzsun2.informatik.uni-hamburg.de!rzsun3.informatik.uni-hamburg.de!eibo From: eibo@rzsun3.informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Eibo Thieme) Newsgroups: comp.edu Subject: Re: Automatic checking the students' answers Message-ID: Date: 15 Oct 90 14:19:36 GMT References: Sender: news@informatik.uni-hamburg.de (News) Distribution: comp Organization: University of Hamburg, FRG Lines: 73 juh@cs.hut.fi (Juha Hyv|nen) writes: >Vision: >------ > Student Jack sends a request by e-mail to a mail server asking > for question # 1. The server sends him back the following. > "Show the heap after each insertion of the keys > A N E X A M P L E into an initially empty heap." > When student Jill requests the same question she may get e.g. > the following. > "Show the heap after each insertion of the keys > D I F F E R E N T into an initially empty heap." > The questions are generated by a "question generator" and > there should be some variation between any two student's > questions. > When Jack has solved the problem, he sends back the answer. > Now, the "answer analyzer" checks his answer and gives points > to him. > (Later, Jack could ask the server how he has done and possibly > what was wrong with his answer.) >------ > As I read this article I felt quite uncomfortable, as I couldn't appreciate this vision as much as Juha Hyv|nen appears to do. Being a student of informatics in Germany I am far too close to the intended group to stay calm on such a topic. Automated testing is IMHO one of the most inappropriate methods for evaluating peoples knowledge. Some points to mention are: 1. The set of questions askable is confined to the area of reproducing memorized facts and application of memorized rules. (Anybody out there in AI-land daring to oppose ? :-) 2. Knowledge is *always* embedded, being part of a person acting in the world. To pay attention to this *central* aspect of knowledge it requires direct interaction, which in this context means aural examinations. 3. People tend to forget the nature of learning, believing it being nothing more than is required. The net effect is a very poor standard of education. 4. Much energy will be spent to conform system requirements, ingenious ideas will be considered false. Again, people will see the method, not the contents. Please note, that this is only about education, which is a very reduced view onto learning, i.e. attaining wisdom. And mark, that my arguments are applicable to any automated testing including multiple-choice-tests, not only computer aided testing. I am willing to explicate myself further if there is any interest. eibo -- eibo Thieme * FB Informatik eibo@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de * Universitaet Hamburg ..!uunet!mcsun!unido!fbihh!eibo * Schlueterstr. 70 PHONE: +40 4123-5660 * D-2000 Hamburg 13 (FRG)