Skip to main content

Would Testing by Another Name Still Smell as Stinky?

 


The dreaded word: Test. For students these synonyms strike the same amount of fear and trepidation: exam, quiz, midterm and final. It is a word that creates anxiety, stress and apprehension. Students even get accommodations for testing anxiety. So, when we want to talk about testing as a positive way to create long term learning it is no surprise that people suddenly cannot hear anything about testing without the knee jerk, emotional response. In their article "Making Things Hard on Yourself, But in a Good Way: Creating Desirable Difficulties to Enhance Learning," authors Byork and Byork state that "testing is typically viewed as a vehicle of assessment, not a vehicle of learning." I think most students would agree. 


However, the Byorks' and others' research shows that testing actually facilitates learning better than most commonly practiced methods, but it is difficult to convince students of that fact; mainly because of their lifelong experiences of testing as assessment and usually the main method of determining if they pass or fail a class. Small wonder they have a fight or flight response to discussions about testing. 

What if we reframed or renamed the process? What if testing could be renamed "retrieval practice,"  "knowledge assessment" or "learning analysis?" If teachers, professors, and instructors began to utilize new ways of saying testing that seemed more positive would students be more open to exploring testing as a vehicle of retaining knowledge? 

As a student who has experienced the value of repeated low to no stakes testing as a method of knowledge retention, I know the value of the practice. However, it was not something I easily embraced. It took a while for me to see the results of completing small quizzes over and over again. The results were good and I had to admit that testing worked. 

My point is, reframing something that most people have negative reactions to can help them embrace it and become open to practice it, or at least give it a try. So let's not call it testing, or exams, let's choose a moniker that sounds encouraging and positive. One that inspires feelings of confidence and enthusiasm for learning. 





Comments

  1. You are so right... there is so much negativity in the notion of testing that we have found it difficult for learners to shake.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Let’s throw Learning Styles AND Multiple Intelligences out the window!

Logical-mathematical, musical, analytical, practical, tactile, olfactory, poetic, faith-based, monochromatic—everyone has their own best way of learning and we should cater to each individual’s fundamental learning needs. Maybe some people learn best when surrounded by abstractions in navy, turquoise and yellow. They should all carry this artwork around with them everywhere.  Right? Nonsense! Learning styles and multiple intelligences are related concepts and stem from related literatures. Some of these concepts that have emerged are reasonable, while others are not.  Reasonable:   Gardner’s fundamental argument that people can access learning through multiple avenues—for example, through reading a book, watching a video, and practicing in the field—and learners should engage a variety of avenues in order to optimize learning.   Unreasonable:   The way in which the idea of learning styles has taken root in our collective psyche is not so reasonable. Individuals ...

Learning is an experience. Everything else is just information.

A quote from Albert Einstein.     A quote that spoke to me as I believe it summarized well the concept of Illusions of Comprehension presented by Dr. Robert Bjork.     Illusions of comprehension is the idea that we confuse performance with learning.     Performance is described as that which we can observe – learning as that which we must infer.     I looked up the word infer to make sure I had the exact definition.     To infer is to deduce or conclude from evidence and reasoning.     It is that step beyond memorization where you actually apply the knowledge gained.     What do our intuitions tell us about learning?     Messages we get going through school tell us that learning means doing well on that test or getting a good grade.     I got an ‘A’!     I must have learned the content!     The structure of school contributes to this sense that learning happens and is assessed w...

To grade, or not to grade, that is the learning question.

         “I know grades don’t matter in grad school, but it’s so validating to get a 4.0!” I sent this message to a few friends at the end of FA20. I was happy to know I received a 4.0 GPA after taking 2 PhD classes while working full time (something I hadn’t done in 2 years). If I believe “grades don’t matter in grad school,” why did I get so excited about this assessment of my performance? Why did I finally get A+ grades? I have been in school for over 20 years now…Am I smarter this many years later? Or am I studying better? Is it both? Robert Bjork would probably tell me it is both. On one hand, I am “performing better” because I have deeper foundational knowledge and am able to successfully generate connections/engage processes (Brown et.al., 2014, p.76). On the other hand, graduate school forced me to do my readings before the lecture. As it turns out, learning is optimal for ESL students if they read the content before a lecture (Uni...