View Single Post
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-06-2012, 15:12
Chris Hibner's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Chris Hibner Chris Hibner is offline
Eschewing Obfuscation Since 1990
AKA: Lars Kamen's Roadie
FRC #0051 (Wings of Fire)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Canton, MI
Posts: 1,488
Chris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond reputeChris Hibner has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Learning by Making Rockets & Robots

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber View Post
So, what you are saying is that tests should not be used to evaluate absolute understanding but understanding relative to a peer group?
Not at all (at least not necessarily). If the test is to cover something you just learned and the test is only on material you just learned, then perhaps 90% should be a typical score for a good student. If the test is to determine your absolute knowledge of the entire subject, then the average should be closer to 50% for a good student. Let's face it - subjects are very broad and you only get a glimpse of it in your studies.

Here's an example:

Let's say I'm hiring for an advanced development position in signal processing. In order to determine knowledge, we will use a written test.

Let's say everyone that applies gets 90%+ on the test and there are a lot of 100% scores. Do I really believe that there are that many people that know 90% of all signal processing knowledge. There's no way that is true. Time to write a new test.

If you're trying to determine absolute knowledge of a subject, then ideally on that test only the elite PhD's who are at the top of the field should get 100% (if they're really, really good). PhD's who are marginal should probably score 85%, showing they know maybe 85% of the field of knowledge. People with master's degrees you would expect to score in the 65 - 85% range. Good bachelor's degree candidates would be expected to get maybe 50%.

The point is, just because the bachelor's candidate scores 50%, that doesn't make him an idiot or a bad candidate for a lot of jobs. It just means he doesn't have PhD level knowledge, but that's okay - we expect that. But if the bachelor's candidate came in and scored 85%, then you know he may be brilliant. You would have never found that with the test where everyone scores 95% or better.

If the goal is to determine if your knowledge is "good enough", then the test where many candidates score 90% is appropriate. If your goal is to determine the absolute level of knowledge of a subject, then the having everyone score 90% isn't realistic because very few people know 90% about any subject (unless the subject is very small and limited).
__________________
-
An ounce of perception is worth a pound of obscure.

Last edited by Chris Hibner : 14-06-2012 at 15:22.
Reply With Quote