Point deduction

Firstly, many thanks to Cliff for taking the debate. He has provided strong criticisms so far, especially in important details I had not necessarily thought of. Let us return to the debate. Con Case Con makes 3 points in his R1 about point deduction: It is a complicated system for the student It puts more work on the teachers It is severely imbalanced marking wise (ie. Pass/fail) I will address these points while furthering my case where possible below. Complications for the student On this point, Con gives us an example of involving certainties and ranks. He then proceeds to say that students will have difficulty weighing up various scenarios. There are a few problems with this point: 1 – Students already evaluate such cases. There is only a marginal difference in point deduction. Tests already include such situations. In fact, different mark questions (ie. 1,2,3,4) are essentially the equivalent of ‘ranks’ for question difficulty. In both systems, the student is faced with such complications, if they are calculating this. The only difference for the student in point deduction is that they must consider whether or not to answer a question. However, this is A, not overly complicated and B, is actually included for other benefits – a primary reason for point deduction is to prevent guessing, which skews test results. 2 – Racing against the clock is only a problem for some. Obviously, if a student finishes a test before the time is done (a reasonable amount of time) , then it is likely then have not guessed. The only students that could be affected by these asserted ‘complications’ (see 1) are those underprepared and who are guessing haphazardly. However, this is the wanted effect – point deduction is used primarily to try and discourage random guessing, a thing the current system does not, and cannot prevent. 3- It is doubtful that worse performing students actually calculate such percentages as thought by Con I ask readers, do you truly think that a guessing person who is likely a person who doesn’t try in class and such actually calculates the likelihood of their getting questions correct and then proceeds to answer? I think not. And if the students who are meant to face this ‘additional complication’ already don’t do this in identical circumstances (see 1) , then why would then do this under point deduction? Marking Imbalance Firstly, I’m going to concede that the marking point for the pass/fail score is not ideal. It wasn’t something I’d thought of, so Con wins that point. However, I believe that this is not a major problem (it could be rectified very easily) , and the general idea of the system is still strong. Essentially, a fixing of the pass/fail marks would be no problem for large organisations (private sector, government etc.). Also, given that different tests have different pass mark percentages, this issue would be dealt with adequately at some point and is minor because under both the current system and a point deduction system, pass/fail marks are not uniform. Below are some other points on this subject (marking imbalance): 1 – Pass marks are not everything to a test. For example, let’s say we have a 20 question test and everyone in the class gets in the range of 16-20. The pass mark is 10. Also, for convenience, assume that there are some people who nearly always fail tests. Has the class suddenly skyrocketed in performance? Perhaps, but it is more likely to be an easy test. Tests are meant to assess outcomes. In the case above, it is clear the outcomes assessed are of a lower scale than a standard test. Also (assuming this class represents a reasonable range), everyone would pass this test. This makes a pass mark meaningless. Also, test results are often assessed and compared student vs. student – ie. Any score outside the range of scores (in this case 16-20) is not important. Effectively, pass marks are preset, arbitrary results meant to show certain levels of achievement, not that they necessarily are themselves levels of achievement. 2- Student answers will still provide feedback. Let’s say this Illuminati believing student answers 2 of the 10 questions. While the student will get a reasonable percentage, it illustrates to the teacher that the student does not know 80% of the content he was taught. Regardless of the percentage scored, the teachers get the same feedback, except that the point deduction system discourages guessing. In addition, the fact remains that a higher no. of non-correct answers will likely provoke greater student reflection and feedback for the students. 3- Tests are also assessed based on the range of scores of students Although I also addressed this in (1), a change in the percentages of a student does not matter by itself. So long as the test marking system can adequately distinguish between students, assess students and provide adequate feedback, the test will provide the needed information. Both systems accomplish this, except point deduction discourages guessing. 4- Just dodging questions isn’t smart in point deduction either. Just because a person can get an okay percentage with ease isn’t reason to not try harder to get a much better percentage. If anything, a system which attacks guessing should provide greater critical thinking and thought during the test – if you want points you might have got from guessing, you’ll have to try harder. Even in point deduction one gets marks for working, henceforth, just looking at 8 questions and have slight fears is not reason to avoid putting down working. Teacher workload The first point I would like to mention about this subject is that under point deduction there would likely be a much higher number of blank answers. Blank answers require less effort than incorrect answers to mark (eg, checking for working, faulty working, incorrect answers, parts of a question etc.). Therefore, point deduction systems actually can help lower the teacher workload in marking. Secondly, Con states that teachers will have to ‘look at question ranks and adjust to make a fair test’. What he doesn’t note is that teachers already weigh questions based upon difficulty and their effect on the test and then give a maximum score obtainable on that question. As I’ve said this round, both systems do this. Furthermore, teachers actually wouldn’t have to multiply ranks. The 2.5 doesn’t apply because a student either gets nothing (wrong) , nothing happens (right) and a loss of 1*rank in the case of blanks. Teachers can multiply by 1. Also, even if this was a problem, the system might be adjusted slightly at a later stage (as mentioned before) to a better, refined version. This version might for example include whole numbers for ease (ie. – 2*rank) Finally, the system can be made into a positive scoring system with great ease. Imagine a rank 2 question: Right: 0 (currently) Wrong: -5 Non-attempt: -3 A positive scoring system: Right: 5 Wrong: 0 Non-attempt: 3 This would further simplify any difficulties that might arise from the point deduction system. Unanswered points I’d like to note that Con did not attack any of my benefits of point deduction. Con did not disagree with the fact that my system discourages guessing, which is not advised to be used on serious, real life situations (R1 example). Con also did not attack the point about feedback. Conclusion While the actual pass mark and exact scoring system may not be perfect, it is a minor concern. Given the ease with which these issues can be fixed, and the benefits of point deduction, point deduction is a better system. Rome wasn’t built in a day. Neither are entire marking systems. Fortunately, the key foundations are built very quickly.