Should students give more options/ideas/examples/*whatever the Q is asking for* than it demands?
E.g. If it asks for two, what happens if they give three?
I’ve covered elements of this before (e.g. the system of ‘positive marking’, how mark schemes were structured in this respect in previous exam marker video diaries) so I’m giving an alternative view on this by considering the possible >>‘opportunity cost’ in terms of time in the exam<<.
Or, more like, (the very common problem of) ‘running OUT of time’ in an exam ?
KEY TAKE AWAYS::
- How students’ answers are marked if they give more points than required.
- Sometimes (and this is what I see most often) mark schemes will use ‘positive marking’ meaning they’ll read all of the response and credit the best parts (e.g. if three points are given, when two are asked for, the best two will be marked).
- Other times (usually when specific gaps/tables/spaces are provided to fill in, the first amount of required points given will be marked (e.g. in the example above, only the first two points will be marked, the third won’t even be read).
- Why this can be a way to hedge bets (sometimes) BUT comes with another cost that isn’t directly linked to the mark scheme (but certainly IS linked to their result).
- Obviously this can be beneficial if the mark scheme uses ‘positive marking’, however there is a cost; that being TIME. Time taken on writing more than was required. And that is taking time away from other Qs in the paper that it SHOULD be allocated to.
- What exams are really testing as well as subject knowledge.
- Nope, they’re not just a test of subject knowledge! There are SO many other skills they’re testing. Ability to decipher what the Q is really asking, how much detail is required, at what level, how to put it across succinctly, time management, QWC (quality of written communication), and the list goes on…!
Facebook Comments