Test Corrections Pro/Con

Pro:
➢ Students must have a way to be successful in the class beyond the test.
o What if the student is not a good test taker?
o What if the student is going through some huge personal stress, a bad day?
➢ Teachers must have a way of documenting improvement.
➢ Test Corrections can be done in a quick and efficient framework. With out too much disruption to the class as a whole.
Con
➢ Re-working one problem gives less assurance in general of mastery of a topic. There is a benefit to the “Test” structure. The randomness of the questions requires a greater level of mastery.
➢ A student’s ability to do math should be the primary reflection of the grade. The mastery of the subject is primarily calculated by tests.
o When a parent sees that their child has received a B in a class, there is a reasonable expectation that they have achieved some level of competency with the material.
➢ There is an ability to cheat the system. Tutors, other students, even over utilizing the teacher.
Unknown:
➢ There seems to be little in the way of research in the effectiveness of corrections.

Test Corrections

One of the hallmarks of independent school (private school) education is that almost every interaction must have the likely conclusion of a positive outcome. And why not, why not make success an ever present option.

This philosophy leads to my question: What to do when students do poorly on tests?

Currently at my school there are two basic schemes:

• Test Corrections
• Test Retakes

Both of these have pros and cons which I will lay out in future posts, but I am interested in other methods. Feel free to describe them in the comments...