In this article, the authors attempt to develop measures of
teachers’ combined knowledge of content and students by writing, piloting, and
analyzing results from multiple choice items.
To be honest, this articles’ attempts to conceptualize and
measure teacher knowledge did not resonate strongly with me. A 30 page paper
and detailed questionnaires allowed the authors to come up with conclusions I consider
trite such as “teachers have skills and insights and wisdom beyond that of
other mathematically educated adults” (pg. 395) and “Teachers know that students
often make certain areas in particular areas or that some topics are likely to
be difficult… but teachers often reason about students’ mathematics: They see student work, hear student
statements, and see students solving problems. Teachers must puzzle about what
students are doing or thinking, using their own knowledge of the topic and
their insights about students.” (p. 396) While these conclusions are valid, they
seem quite obvious, and the task of trying to measure and quantify something that
so clearly would be extremely different for every teacher seems disingenuous. Certainly,
I’m a better Math teacher now than I was in my first year – while my
mathematical knowledge has not greatly increased, my knowledge of how students
learn, understand, and make errors has increased, allowing me to teach more
effectively.
The article also challenges the use of Multiple Choice
testing. This has been a regular struggle for me – when teaching in Ontario, my
colleagues and I almost never used multiple choice testing. When I wrote my
first test for my first job teaching in BC, I showed it to the department head
for input, and he said “it looks good, but where’s the multiple choice?” Having now taught and subbed at multiple
schools in Vancouver, I notice that multiple choice testing is the norm, and
often can even make up students’ entire grades in some classes. As per the
authors, I think it’s important that we “think carefully about the
multiple-choice format” (p. 396). This
form of testing can lead or mislead students to correct or incorrect answers,
and does not test skills in the same way that a full solution allows us to
evaluate process and thinking. I believe the long tradition of provincial
exams, along with bigger classes and less prep time encourage multiple choice
testing in BC classrooms, but that the Ministry should be more involved with
standardizing evaluation so that students are not being primarily evaluated in
a multiple choice format.
Question: Do you think that Multiple Choice testing
accurately evaluates students? Do you
think the Ministry of Education has a role in dictating the types of
assessments in BC classrooms?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing, David! I agree with your take that Multiple Choice testing can lead or mislead students to correct or incorrect answers, depending on how closely related the answers may be and whether the intent is to throw red herrings or consume more time if a "proceed by elimination" approach is adopted. I also agree that multiple choice testing may not test skills in the same way that a full solution allows us to evaluate process and thinking - after all, all teachers see at the end are the shaded bubbles, or worse still, just the overall test score since a computer program may mark these tests for efficiency. Besides, I believe that attaining success on a multiple choice test also depends on a range of factors which may not necessarily be the skills or knowledge that we are evaluating the students on. For example, the number of questions on the test, the sequence of difficulty of the questions, the amount of time allocated for the test, the number of options and combinations (e.g. all/none of the above, A and C) available to choose from, the approach one takes on such a test (e.g. do those that are confidently answered, and make an educated guess for those that one is unsure about, with a 25% probability of getting the question right with 4 available options) may all play a role on how well a student does on that multiple choice test; which ultimately begs the question on what teachers are trying to evaluate from the test.
ReplyDeleteAs a Mathematics student, I believe multiple choice testing only occurred in my earlier elementary school years, and never again after that. Multiple choice testing may have its merits in areas which require certainty in specific details that may matter to enhance the understanding of general principles (e.g. like in the intricacies of grammar perhaps?). However, I believe that in Mathematics, at least in the formative years from K to 12, there is great value in alternative forms of testing that allow educators to better understand student thinking, so as to adapt their teaching more effectively. I also believe that if it is a significant enough change needed to drive the curriculum or assessment, the Ministry has the responsibility to take the initiative in highly encouraging the change, as long as their intent and purpose is clear that it may add value to student understanding and learning.
Just to share a personal story (though for a different subject) that may help to clinch my point a little better:
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a high school Economics student, one component of the GCE A Level examinations was the multiple choice section. Its merit here was that it allowed for specific theoretical details (no matter how obscure) to be tested, and so students had to ensure that they were well-versed with every tiny detail to be prepared for the exam. What resulted was cramming tons of practice with multiple choice questions so that we could be so familiar with the range of available questions that it would take us minimal time to complete them. It was often also a test of how fast we could think and compute, how shrewd we were in managing our time when faced with more challenging or out-of-the-norm questions, or how careful/careless we were when reading the questions, computing and even shading the bubbles. While many of my friends liked this multiple choice component because it was almost an easy percentage in the bag with much practice, I genuinely felt that it drained my interest for the subject. It didn't take me long to lose interest in understanding why the answer was A, and not B/C/D, as it seemed more efficient just to be exposed to and practise more questions, without the need to have a deeper understanding of the concepts. Some teachers too, seemed to thrive on picking the more obscure details to test students on, to prepare students for a certain degree of variation or challenge in the questions.
In the first few years of becoming a high school Economics teacher, I was honestly thankful and relieved that the Ministry had removed the multiple choice component from the GCE A Level Economics examination. I felt that the key concepts, deeper understanding and real life application of Economics stemmed from the appreciation of the subject, and honestly did not require the knowledge (let alone fine expertise) of some of the previously-tested obscure and minute details, at least at the high school level which was often times the students' first exposure to the subject. Although many teachers and students point out that Economics is now more challenging as a subject because there is less certainty in securing good grades with open-ended questions, I beg to differ. I strongly believe that there is so much more room now to explore the subject and engage the students, and still prepare them with important skills of thinking, understanding, critical analysis and multiple perspectives, than if some of the already limited curriculum time had to be spent on training students in multiple choice test-taking skills. The focus of teaching may also look very different if the multiple-choice component was still on the exam.
What I see multiple choices format and other alternatives is that they all have advantages and disadvantages. With the given size of our class, multiple choice tests in math require relatively less time to administer for an required amount of material than would tests requiring essay responses. Saying that, multiple choice format does provide more comprehensive evaluation of students's extent of knowledge,specifically in math, within a certain time frame. However, more debates of registering multiple choice test lies in the complex of static knowledge and dynamic understanding of math concepts. What should be evaluated in the test is playing a key role in the choice of the measurement tools.
ReplyDeleteWhat I see multiple choices format and other alternatives is that they all have advantages and disadvantages. With the given size of our class, multiple choice tests in math require relatively less time to administer for an required amount of material than would tests requiring essay responses. Saying that, multiple choice format does provide more comprehensive evaluation of students's extent of knowledge,specifically in math, within a certain time frame. However, more debates of registering multiple choice test lies in the complex of static knowledge and dynamic understanding of math concepts. What should be evaluated in the test is playing a key role in the choice of the measurement tools.
ReplyDelete