The issues with these sorts of evaluations are inherent in their design. By sitting for an exam, some will have enhanced performance, some perform the same, some (because of anxiety or other reasons) will have their performance decrease.

They possess the knowledge and skills, but having a sit down MC exam reduced their ability to recall or think critically. I don’t think that’s hard to understand. My concern is, how would anyone administer a test at that scale and not introduce biases? Haven’t even started talking about the issues with test question writers.

Every method used by modern public “education” has been shown, time and time and time again, to be the WORST methods for teaching or evaluation. Even by “scholars” and their “research” (I’m a PhD at a university - yes, I work on a ship that is sinking). Yet we continue to use those methods because … I have no idea why, unless we want to purposely ruin children.

The issues with these sorts of evaluations are inherent in their design. By sitting for an exam, some will have enhanced performance, some perform the same, some (because of anxiety or other reasons) will have their performance decrease.

They possess the knowledge and skills, but having a sit down MC exam reduced their ability to recall or think critically. I don’t think that’s hard to understand. My concern is, how would anyone administer a test at that scale and not introduce biases? Haven’t even started talking about the issues with test question writers.

Every method used by modern public “education” has been shown, time and time and time again, to be the WORST methods for teaching or evaluation. Even by “scholars” and their “research” (I’m a PhD at a university - yes, I work on a ship that is sinking).