|
Re: Rules Test
We have a similar test:
Each rule (or sub-rule) is at least one question. This occasionally means very complicated rules may have a few questions associated with them, but every game rule is covered. A typical question may propose a scenario and ask about any rules consequence (if any), or or ask how many points some configuration is worth.
The test is free-response, no blanks or multiple choice.
Anyone on the team can take the test as many times as they want. To be considered eligible for the drive team, students must score 90% or higher.
Tests are returned to students with just the question marked incorrect, and no explanation of which part of their response was incorrect - they need to figure it out by re-reading the rules or consulting with their peers.
Once they score >90%, we take that as an indicator that they really have studied in depth, but just slipped up a little, and go over all the wrong answers in detail to make sure they have 100% mastery of the game.
I think our test does a good job of producing drive team candidates who have an excellent grasp of the rules of the game, but it is intimidating for people who want to get a sense of how well they know the rules. In general, the only students who take the test intend to become drive team candidates, but I think everybody could stand to learn the rules better.
I think having two tests actually might make sense for our team - one "lighter" test that goes over basic mechanics and common scenarios, and our in-depth test for the drive team.
|