In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:
This is related to the thread about student capacities, but I figured it should probably be its own thread. I am just starting to teach my own courses, and so far have avoided exams. I figured they encourage more rote memorization than anything else, can be pretty stressful, and it seems fine for students to learn one or two topics in depth for their papers and then learn through smaller assignments like reading responses. However, I am starting to worry that students might have pretty major misunderstandings of some core ideas in the class, and several seem to be unable to recall other topics we discussed in class. I'm wondering if I should just accept this as a worthwhile cost to not having exams (or perhaps this would not change even with exams), or whether I should figure out a way to incorporate exams into my syllabi in the future (in a way that isn't just super easy to cheat).
I usually give exams in my courses for this reason (I teach only undergrads), and use other types of assessments (reading responses, term papers, presentations, etc.) for other skills (e.g., argumentation, etc.). I personally tend to find that exams help me to better gauge how students are grasping the course material overall, which students grasp it better than others, and in turn whether there are things I might do to improve student comprehension.
But this is just me. What about you all? Do you exams? Why/why not?
Leave a Reply