Hacker News Reader

Comment by snyp | Hacker News Reader

This approach does not really solve the core issue. In practice, students often do poorly when evaluation is concentrated in one end of term exam. It also pushes many students to cram at the end of the term instead of learning steadily.

A better approach is to rethink what we assess and how we assess it. Research shows that the design of assessments plays an important role in academic integrity. Assignments that require original thinking and regular engagement can reduce incentives to cheat and improve learning outcomes.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22119...

View on HN

> Assignments that require original thinking and regular engagement can reduce incentives to cheat and improve learning outcomes.

At some point in college when I was thinking about law school, I learned about the Socratic Method. It was weird because up to that point in college, I just pretty much flew under the radar and took exams. It was far different than high school, and I realized my high school did pretty much use the Socratic Method. It wasn't as intense as law school, but every class, maybe 4-5 people would we grilled by teachers. This was called "participation."

Shy? Anxiety? Yeah, that didn't matter. Your number would eventually be up a few times a month. You had to prepare and know the assignments, otherwise your grade would suffer and public humiliation was a real thing.

It's a noble motivation (and not even unrealistic in 2015) but what you'll get would still be generative output.

If the only remedy is monitored end of term exams, so be it.

Err why can’t there be weekly monitored exams in class?

What exactly is that remediating? I don’t think that approach solves the problem of helping kids learn better.

Perhaps students should learn this information throughout the semester instead of on the last night or morning before exams?

If your goal is for them to know the entire material, then it makes sense to test their knowledge of the entire course in one exam, which also allows them to study at their own pace and order. If someone is unable to pass the exam or retain all the information, then consider whether you need such professionals.

then they fail. We are talking about adults.

Students are also people. If we're managing a software project, a single deadline at the end is sure to suffer from delays. It's better to split things into shorter deliverables with more frequent feedback.

You can have optional assignments and quizzes that serve that purpose.

If you take away the credit given for homework, you still can give feedback, while removing any incentive to cheat.

Few students do optional assignments unfortunately. Other tasks that are directly worth a gradetend to take priority (e.g. studying for another class that has an exam this week).

1. Class attendance is frequently optional, but students still attend.

2. I had a prof. that didn't require homework be done. He would give out "practice fun" and would gladly sit down, give feedback and 1:1 time to those who completed it, or tried. He also pointed out that it was rare to pass the exams for students who didn't do "practice fun". Most people did the work.

It leads me to believe - from my own experience too - that students generally aren't stupid, and will gladly do the work if there is a point. Plenty of homework is pure busywork though, even at the college level.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com