In class midterms and finals have never been an assumed
component of my syllabi. I have always questioned
whether tests allow students to demonstrate integrative knowledge and the
ability to apply concepts. Students can
sink their teeth into an experiential fieldtrip or a reflective essay – tests
simply measure a student’s ability to regurgitate information. Furthermore, quantitative assessment of
qualitative methodologies seems at odds, almost an oxymoron.
But this semester I assigned a midterm in a class called
“Everyday Life in Urban Settings,” a class that introduces the students to
qualitative methodologies and asks them to explore, through experiential field
experiences, neighborhoods in the city through the lens of theories about New
York City’s changing urban landscape. In
addition to a midterm, students are also asked to keep a weekly blog where they
post their responses to the readings and fieldtrips. For their final, students are asked to create
a “walking tour” of their neighborhood, or of the “cultural scene” they have
chosen for their Constructive Action class.
The fact is, students take a test more “seriously” than they
do some of the more qualitative methodologies that may better represent course
content. Though the midterm was only
worth 20% of their grade, all the students came to class, on time, with the readings
and notes from the class semester. All
had prepared. All stayed and worked for
the majority of the 2 and ½ hour class. What
made this test “different” was that I asked students to write the midterm (and
post their ideas on a Moodle Forum):
“Imagine you were writing the test for this class. What questions would you include?” I explained to the students that the purpose
of this was two-fold: 1) it would allow them to review the material, and to
identify the most important ideas; and 2) particularly good questions would
become part of the midterm. If they
wrote the question, they would know the answer to the question; furthermore, if
they read each other’s posts, they could prepare answers ahead of time.
Almost all of the students posted questions by the Sunday
deadline even though the class wasn’t until the following Thursday. One wrote in all caps: “PAY ATTENTION CLASSMATES!” as her forum post
title. She introduced her questions with
an excellent reminder: she hoped the
test would be more an “overview”, a best hits of sorts, than a “boring midterm.” Many of her questions, as well as those of
others, ended up on the midterm. The
questions overall showed innovation as well as knowledge of the major concepts
we had covered. Before handing out the
test, I congratulated them on the questions they came up with. They said they really enjoyed the process, and
that all tests should be like this. It
allowed them to study and reflect, to contribute to the assessment tool in real
ways. They were excited to see their
questions on the test, empowering the students and helping put them in charge
of their own learning.
This represents the notion of a “democratic classroom” where
“classroom engagement techniques are designed to help students take personal
responsibility for their learning appreciate the value of participating in the
life of a community, while also developing a sense of self-confidence, empowerment,
and efficacy” (Spiezio in Jacob, Civic
Engagement in Higher Education, 91) Asking
the students to write questions for the midterm provided them “with authentic
opportunities to participate collectively in decision-making processes relating
to the administration of a course, including syllabus construction, assessment
procedures, and the specification of classroom protocols that both students and
faculty are expected to observe (Spiezio, 90).
According to Spiezio, the democratic classroom is a central feature of
the democratic academy. (For more on the
democratic classroom, see Kim Zpiezio, “Engaging General Education” in Barbara
Jacobi’s Civic Engagement in Higher
Education (2009)).
Because students were part of the test-making process, they
had a higher investment in the course material.
They knew what to expect. There
were no major “surprises.” And in my
eyes, students had already passed, as they took the time to review the material
and apply their inductive reasoning skills to identify the main points of the
semester overall. If in class midterms
and tests do make it into my syallbi in the future, so will this democratic
test-writing activity.
The students, overall, did well on the midterm. (Interestingly, the students who posted the most
thorough questions on the Moodle forum also earned the highest grades on the midterm.) When I handed back the midterm, I asked students
to reflect on the process. They said
many things that surprised me. They said
they still had to work and prepare, but that they knew what to expect, and that
this helped alleviate test-taking anxieties.
They helped each other: If one
student posted a question that another did not know the answer to, they could
get the answer ahead of time; in this way, the midterm promoted collaboration
and students as “information sources”. Students
actually enjoyed the midterm (yes,
you read that right!) because they felt they were part of the process. I invite you to try this technique with your
next midterm or quiz, and post your (and your students’) experiences with this process
here.
No comments:
Post a Comment