Online Exams and Quizzes

[HigherEd7]

I was wondering if anyone else has tried this or is currently doing it. I am thinking about assigning bi-weekly online quizzes with no time limit and I will give them 3 attempts to earn the highest score. I will not give them access to the correct or incorrect answers so they will have to take the time to read and find the answer.

I know there have been several discussions about the time limit on exams to prevent students from looking up all of the answers. I have used a minute per multiple choice question and I have tried 45 seconds a question. Does anyone have any other ideas?

[polly_mer]

Ask questions that are hard to look up instead of factual recall.

Have enough questions in the random pool that merely writing down the questions during the first try doesn't result in unlimited time to look up all the questions on later tries.

Focus more on what students need to know for future life and less on preventing cheating on check boxes of the truly trivial.

[Caracal]

Ask questions that are hard to look up instead of factual recall.

Have enough questions in the random pool that merely writing down the questions during the first try doesn't result in unlimited time to look up all the questions on later tries.

Focus more on what students need to know for future life and less on preventing cheating on check boxes of the truly trivial.

I've basically come to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter that much if some students can look things up and get correct answers without reading on quizzes or reading responses. Basically, these things work because they get your more responsible students to actually do the reading which usually results in better discussions and better grades. The student who thinks they are beating the system by passing the quiz without doing the reading is just shooting themselves in the foot for the exams.

[polly_mer]

The student who thinks they are beating the system by passing the quiz without doing the reading is just shooting themselves in the foot for the exams.

Is the big-picture goal really to have students pass the exams or is the big-picture goal to learn something of value to one's current and future life?

If all that class is doing is focusing on low-level factual recall that can be looked up in later life if the detail ever becomes important, then that situation is still undermining the reasons for taking classes to either develop skills like critical thinking or to learn a whole new discipline for which factual recall alone is only one baby step on the journey.  The point of college education is not to pass one-time classes.  The idea of cheating oneself is tied to deliberately side-stepping the whole process of learning, which is what makes education a valuable experience in and of itself, regardless of the grade awarded at one point in time.

I'm reminded of one colleague was very proud of the rigor in his rerquired-for-all-except-transfer-students general education class that only had one midterm, one final paper, and one final exam with a pretty low pass rate.  The new chair, a long-time colleague who lost the coin toss for this term, was horrified when she led the committee doing review due to a student complaint.  Yes, the student was indeed correct that the exams were hard because most questions relied on remembering material that was presented once in one footnote instead of focusing on the big picture context with applications of the type of thinking that was supposedly being reinforced through the discussions all term.  Eliminating that one class was a mandatory part of a general education renovation a few years ago because even the good students cited that class as a low point in the college experience.

[Caracal]

The student who thinks they are beating the system by passing the quiz without doing the reading is just shooting themselves in the foot for the exams.

Is the big-picture goal really to have students pass the exams or is the big-picture goal to learn something of value to one's current and future life?

If all that class is doing is focusing on low-level factual recall that can be looked up in later life if the detail ever becomes important, then that situation is still undermining the reasons for taking classes to either develop skills like critical thinking or to learn a whole new discipline for which factual recall alone is only one baby step on the journey. 

To tell the truth I actually have no idea whether requiring students to do a quiz or some sort of reading check causes them to do better on exams.
What I do know is that I get much better engagement in class at my current institution when there is an incentive for students to do the reading, which is why I do them.

My theory on this is that you can basically divide students into three groups with reading. Group A is going to do the reading most of the time no matter what. Group C isn't going to do most of the reading under basically any circumstances. Group B will do it if you make them think they need to.
I've found the proportions vary enormously by institution. I've taught at places where most students were group A and I didn't need to do anything to get the vast majority of them to do the reading. But I teach now at a place where a lot of students, even pretty good ones are group B. If you give them a nudge they do the reading. The group C ones respond to the nudges by trying to look stuff up online. I try to make questions that will make this harder for them, but at the end of the day I'm not all that concerned about them.

The psychology of the middle group is always a little confusing to me. I think perhaps it is just about approaches to work and decision making. Some students just will do the reading because it is assigned, there's no decision. Actually the Group C students are probably the same. They aren't doing the reading, the question just becomes about whether they are going to try to bs their way through it. The middle group once they decide to do it, usually decides that they ought to at least try to read the thing before they take the quiz or do the response paper.

[the_geneticist]

Your "Group B" students may also be doing some rather savvy game theory strategy.  Basically, they know that it will take time to do the readings.  Preparing for the class may lead to a reward (easy to participate in discussion, earning points on a quiz, etc.).  Not doing the reading may incur a penalty (class is confusing, loss of participation points, etc.).  They may be deciding that if the reward is low (or non-existent) and the penalty is low or non-existent (e.g. can participate even if they haven't read, no quiz, etc.), then it's a better use of their time to skip the readings.
In my experience, these "Group B" students are either very clever and will do well regardless (rare) or they are simply very busy (most of my students).  If they have to try and balance a full course load, family responsibilities, a job, etc. then they are trying to minimize any work they see as extra.

[Aster]

My theory on this is that you can basically divide students into three groups with reading. Group A is going to do the reading most of the time no matter what. Group C isn't going to do most of the reading under basically any circumstances. Group B will do it if you make them think they need to.

This for admissions-selective colleges.

For open enrollment colleges, I'd widen Group B to include people that do *some* of the readings if you make them think that they need to.

[Caracal]

They may be deciding that if the reward is low (or non-existent) and the penalty is low or non-existent (e.g. can participate even if they haven't read, no quiz, etc.), then it's a better use of their time to skip the readings.
In my experience, these "Group B" students are either very clever and will do well regardless (rare) or they are simply very busy (most of my students).  If they have to try and balance a full course load, family responsibilities, a job, etc. then they are trying to minimize any work they see as extra.

Yeah, I think you're right. You aren't very likely to get As on exams in my class if you don't do any reading, but if you come to class and pay attention to discussions, you can certainly get Bs easily enough, which is all a lot of my students want. I don't blame them, but when you have too many people doing this it doesn't create the conditions in which the class can actually function well.

The amount of other things many of my students are balancing along with school always amazes me. I was a good student in college only because I didn't really have anything else to do. I worked in the summer and for a few semesters I had an on campus job I worked at 4 or 5 hours a week, but that was it. It made it easy to be a good, fairly diligent student even though I had terrible time management skills and spent a lot of time drinking beer and watching TV. If I was working 40 hours a week and lived at home with my family who frequently needed me to do things for them, I never would have managed.