The results are in. This week, Wezi and I sat down to grade the tests, and this, too, was a lot harder than it seemed. Our students didn't do well on the oral test, and that is ironic since we gave it to help out students that we were sure wouldn't do well on a written exam. I think it brought everyone's grades down though. And overall, the class did not perform well. So what should I make of it? Was the test hard? I dont think so- it was everything we taught and reviewed. Did we not teach effectively? Maybe, but everyone seemed to grasp it during the review. I think that simple machines, and knowledge of how they work, is practical knowledge, and maybe it is hard to express in test responses. So maybe it was the test. I dont know, but I emailed F and gave her a spread sheet with the results, so I dont know whether or not she will use them. But while grading, two questions came up:
First, how much should each portion of the test be worth? Wezi and I had to sit and deliberate, since we didnt do it beforehand. But the reason why is connected to the next question, which is...
Should student's performance on the test determine how much its worth? In my experience, it has. If the whole class does poorly, my teachers have sometimes altered the value of the test or scrapped it altogether. But we didn't see any inherent error in the test. So is it ok to just weigh the section that yielded the worst grades less than the other? Is that accurate? And how do you get grades in if students dont perform well on tests? I know its not all about grades, but they have to be reported at some point. There has to be a tangible reflection of performance.