View the edtech Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in edtech's December 1992 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in edtech's December 1992 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the edtech home page.
Just a comment on Steve Tripp's observation that the "smart guys" can be separated from the "not smart guys" without an IQ test. That is perfectly sensible, and those who teach know that the "better" students can be identified early in a course. But the course must still take place, because there is a lot of information that has to be transferred and absorbed. Tests are miserable necessesities that screen out the incompetent (to paraphrase one of Matthew Arnold's characters, I think). But there IQ tests and the like have, or should or could have, a different purpose, which is to identify people whose potential is obscured by behavioural or other factors. Whether these tests are used in this way, I don't know, and in my classes early in the term I use my own haphazard questioning to try to identify the potentially good students. Written tests are probably only useful when large scale screening is necessary, and when it doesn't matter (to the testers) who is lost in the shuffle. - Gary Davis Davis@UnbSJ.CA