Assessment
Almost every teacher and student knows that objective tests (e.g., multiple choice, fill in the blank) are not the best way to assess what someone really knows about a topic, or how well someone could perform a task. This is especially true, for example, when we think about meaningful or functional knowledge that most university students will need when they go out into the "real world". Imagine that I was a highschool superintendent and I had access to your grades for this educational psychology class and I was trying to decide whether or not to hire you. Would I look to see whether or not you knew the definition for authentic assessment, or would I look to see what your grade was for "teacher for twenty minutes" or, better yet, would I look to see what comments your instructor had written about your "teacher for twenty minutes"? I think if most of us were this supervisor we would be much more interested in how you performed in your simulated teaching as opposed to facts you memorized about definitions for a test. If I was going to hire an engineer to build a bridge, would I give the student a series of math equations to solve ("plug and chug"), or would I present the engineer with a design problem and examine the way he or she went about solving it. I would probably do the latter. If I wanted to hire a new writer for my advertising agency, would I be interested in how well the student did on fill-in-the-blank tests of definitions for buzz words in a marketing text book, or would I want to see a sample of the student's writing? I think the answer is obvious. I'm sure you can think of many other examples of situations where a more subjective, problem solving, creative, open-ended type of assessment would be much more meaningful than traditional objective assessment techniques.
So why in the world do you have to take so many multiple-choice tests (like in this class)? One reason becomes obvious if we reconsider the examples above, but we add a new variable to the scenarios and pretend that the person doing the evaluating/hiring has to evaluate 100 potential workers, and what's more, has to do it in a day. Multiple choice, fill-in-the-blank, and equations with a single answer are all assessments that can be graded very quickly and, in fact, they can be graded by a machine, like the multiple choice questions in the virtual lectures. Also, if you knew an instructor had to grade 100s of student assignments you probably would be reluctant to say that the large number of multiple choice tests is a problem with lazy teachers, and, for those of you who plan to teach, I think you'll especially agree the first time you have several sections of a high school class that need some sort of assessment. If you can do assessments quickly you have extra time to prepare your lessons, class activities, and to focus on individual instruction with students who may need it more. Further, another big advantage of what I'm calling "objective tests" is that they are indeed objective. All instructors have their own biases, and in grading of subjective types of tests such as essays, open-ended problem solving tests, or teacher for twenty minutes presentations, it's very difficult for the instructor to grade objectively and fairly, as compared to a multiple choice tests. This fundamental dilemma between objective and what I'll refer to as "alternative" tests is presented in Figure 1. So, how do you get around this problem? What types of tests should you use? There's no clear answer, but surely one good solution is to try and strike some balance, such that some of your assessments are efficient and objective, while others are more meaningful, complex, and "real life".
![Figure comparing traditional and alternative assessment](assessment.gif)
Figure 1. Comparison of "Objective" and "Alternative" Assessment