BBC NEWS | Education | Less is more for online marking: "Less is more for online marking Exam candidate Students are being told to write concisely A-level geography students whose papers are marked online have been advised to keep their answers to length. Sceptics fear the move is technology driven and may not be a fair way of testing students' ability."
This is the sort of story people who are a bit anti-technology in education absolutely lap up. Surely there has to be some sort of compromise when it comes to designing testing / work for students which involves any type of technology. Whether the technology in question is a computer or just using the alphabet. Doesn't it have to be appropriate and fit for purpose? Why would you attempt to shoehorn a method of appraising work which worked in one context into another where it just won't fit? If students have to write concisely and writing concisely is one of the skills you want to foster... then... ermmm... isn't that a good outcome of using a technology-based system?
I've experienced systems in the past which have been negatively affected by technology. I remember doing a course where everyone lost marks on a certain question because we were told the 'system' had been set up to accept an incorrect answer as being correct and that that there was nothing that could be done about it. But... though it was frustrating in the extreme, things have moved on and using technology in assessment is a lot more flexible than it used to be and if we don't learn from mistakes and issues, then what's the point at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment