There is, I think, an important distinction that needs to be made between certain types of knowledge and certain types of evaluative procedures. If you read last weeks post you’re probably up to date about my big test and my note card usage. What you might not be up to date about are my thoughts about said evaluation. Currently, I’m studying for a somewhat lengthy multiple choice test evaluating what I think of as memorized knowledge: “Match this to that,” or “Which of the following don’t belong?” or “What year did this event take place in. The problems with this type of test, to me, are great.
Bear with me for a moment because I’m going to talk about math. I was always good at math in school. Phenomenal. I scored high among my peers and in my state. I’m pretty sure I always had an “A” … until geometry. (Bear with me). For the most part basic mathematics simply asks you to perform one function over and over again. Think of it like an assembly line. My job is to paint the clowns nose red. So I do it… over and over again. Same thing with most elementary and high school math. Know the function: get the answer. In geometry though they asked for something different: the “proof.” This was akin to reinventing the wheel as far as I was concerned. The questions were like this: The angle is ninety degrees (thanks trusty protractor)… prove that the angle is ninety degrees with math (instead of by other reasonable means). This flipped the question. It asked you to demonstrate a knowledge of concepts in a more complex way. While I didn’t appreciate this type of thinking in math (because I could always get the answer without that type of knowledge… at least with high school math) I do appreciate it in my own field.
At higher levels math is an art. I’m studying art. Art is also an art. The art isn’t memorization. The art isn’t repeating the same exact function over and over again for the same exact result. The art is something different. The art is that other type of knowledge, isn’t it? Isn’t it less multiple choice and more essay? My final proof (of concept) is to note that anyone with a device with access to the internet (many of them fit in your pocket now) would have access to the same information I spent the last weeks memorizing. Their answers would also be correct. I guess I’m thinking this: if technology is good for anything it is good for quick access to all types of “memorized” information. Couldn’t our time be better spent?