Comments on: Testing, testing, testing - what is more important the test or the content? http://blog.realprojects.co.uk/2009/09/testing-testing-testing-whats-more-important-the-test-or-the-content/ E-learning and learning technologies Fri, 18 May 2012 06:05:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Steve Harris http://blog.realprojects.co.uk/2009/09/testing-testing-testing-whats-more-important-the-test-or-the-content/#comment-7320 Steve Harris Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:59:13 +0000 http://blog.realprojects.co.uk/?p=190#comment-7320 That’s a very interesting point. I work in Higher Education and have also been teaching Archery for many years, so I can appreciate the relevance of this example. Taking a bike to pieces without dropping a tool is not a test of the specific skills of the Keirin race, but I can see how it would test the participants concentration and ability to operate within strict rules, which I would imagine are very important skills for the race, especially with several judges watching each race for minor infringements of very strict rules. This can be a big problem for educators in any environment. It's often easy for students to see the external skills required for a specific task, (ie follow the pacer around the track, stay with it, then sprint to the finish), but not so easy to appreciate those more subtle skills (pacing yourself, reacting to the increasing speed of the pacer at the correct moment in each race). But it is those subtle skills which can win the race, and for students, make all the difference in their performance after the test itself. I have spent a lot of time explaining explicitly, why I have set a specific task which may not directly relate to external skills, but help develop more relevant subtle skills, usually analysis and problem solving skills. Most students eventually understand once they have been through the process once and realised what an impact those subtle skills could have had, but there are always a few who get fixated on those external skills. It's a difficult barrier. In this example, perhaps if the participants were made to understand the purpose of the content, the test itself would become important? That’s a very interesting point. I work in Higher Education and have also been teaching Archery for many years, so I can appreciate the relevance of this example. Taking a bike to pieces without dropping a tool is not a test of the specific skills of the Keirin race, but I can see how it would test the participants concentration and ability to operate within strict rules, which I would imagine are very important skills for the race, especially with several judges watching each race for minor infringements of very strict rules.

This can be a big problem for educators in any environment. It’s often easy for students to see the external skills required for a specific task, (ie follow the pacer around the track, stay with it, then sprint to the finish), but not so easy to appreciate those more subtle skills (pacing yourself, reacting to the increasing speed of the pacer at the correct moment in each race).

But it is those subtle skills which can win the race, and for students, make all the difference in their performance after the test itself. I have spent a lot of time explaining explicitly, why I have set a specific task which may not directly relate to external skills, but help develop more relevant subtle skills, usually analysis and problem solving skills. Most students eventually understand once they have been through the process once and realised what an impact those subtle skills could have had, but there are always a few who get fixated on those external skills. It’s a difficult barrier.

In this example, perhaps if the participants were made to understand the purpose of the content, the test itself would become important?

]]>