NEW EXAMINATIONS from OLD* B. CLIFFORD HENDRICKS University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska
AND
B. H. HANDORF Park Collepe, Parkville, Missouri
OST teachers in the rush of routine work have, on occasion, given some student the same "make up" examination as that used a few days previously for the regular examination. Such teachers, if questidned, would probably insist that that was not their routine practice. Or it may be that we recall a report by some teacher colleague of "springing" the same examination a second time upon some delinquent student with the result that a lower grade was achieved upon the last paper than on the first. Such stories usually close with a semi-apology for having used the same examination more than once. From answers to a questionnaire referred to in a previous paper' thirty-five per cent. of the teachers who replied stated that they never used "old examination questions" in preparing new tests. It appears that tradition has built up a mental set, on the part of some teachers, against re-use of examination questions. In common with other traditions this may need a critical examination before it is accepted as desirable or undesirable. Experience is generally considered valuable, even when the results are negative. In the present case this principle finds many skeptics as regards its application to examinations. Experience as recorded in textbooks, in laboratory manuals, in work-books, and books on chemical synthesis is valuable; i t can be used again and again with profit. That which is recorded in these has been found workable; it brings results. But examination questions, according to tradition, are
M
* Presented before the Division of Chemical Education at the ninety-sixth meeting of the A. C. S.,Milwaukee, Wis., September
.,
7 102P *""U.
HENDRICKS, B. C . m B. H. HANDORE, "Examination practice in general college chemistry," J. CHEM.EDUC., 15, 178 (Apr., 1933).
never to be re-used. Many teachers believe that it is better to formulate a new question rather than to re-use a question which experience has shown to be a good one. In fact, some would go so far as to consider such a re-use a reflection upon the industry and character of the user. Is such an attitude correct or justifiable? From the questionnaire referred to above it was learned that sixty-five per cent. of the teachers responding did re-use examination questions. Evidently, since they confess to such a practice, they must consider experience gleaned from one use of a question of value in its later use. They probably subscribe to such practice because they believe experience gained by one trial to be valuable in the revision of such questions for later use. It can be shown that, by repeated use, such questions may be evaluated for degree of difficulty and for the validity of their measure of pupil success in chemistry. In other words, examination questions may be edited for use much as textbooks may be improved by revision or laboratory manuals may be chosen or discarded for laboratory use according to the difficulty and reliability of their experiments measured by the performance of the students. If certain specific questions give reliable evidence of student nnderstanding and achievement then those questions, like a thermometer, may profitably be used more than once for measurements. One sort of experience which the trial of examinations may give has to do with the types2 of questions which are most satisfactory in measuring student achievement. There is evidencea that teachers are experimenting in the use of different test forms. The method 'TELLER, J. D., "The integration of some forms of multiple choice tests for instructional purposes," Science Educ.. 22, 18994 (Apr., 1938). a HENDRICKS, B. C. AND B . F. HANDORP, bc.
