Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!gillies From: gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu Newsgroups: comp.edu Subject: Re: Automatic checking the students' an Message-ID: <4200038@m.cs.uiuc.edu> Date: 24 Oct 90 01:03:00 GMT References: <90@ Lines: 29 Nf-ID: #R: Automated testing is IMHO one of the most inappropriate methods for > evaluating peoples knowledge. Some points to mention are: I concur. > 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 ? :-) However, there are problem domains (i.e. learning the vocabulary of a foreign language) where memorization is essential. In high school I raised my French vocabulary scores a full grade point, by programming a simple rote quiz. I could not achieve the same results with hand study or flash cards. The key to my success was to use the program to analyze (statistically) when I had learned the answers, and elinate them from a series of questions. > 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. true intelligence is the manifestation of a creative problem-solving mind primed with a rich supply of well-organized background information. Automated testing may be able to supply the background information, but can never teach problem solving.