Blend Kit 2012 Week 3

I have my version of Murphy’s Law, which I call Tucker’s Law:  If anyone can possibly find a way to misunderstand you, they will.  There is a corollary to Tucker’s Law:  In online course, this law is taken to the second power.

Whether one’s assessments online are summative or formative, formal or informal, written or in some other mode, clarity of instruction is key.  Clarity in why it’s being assigned, how it’s to be completed, how it is to be submitted (and when), and how it will be evaluated (graded).  All the ways that you can clarify in a face-to-face course have to be pre-packaged in an online environment, OR you can expect lots of incorrect assignments or lots of emails asking for explanations.

This principle is somewhat less true in the hybrid environment, but it still happens, especially if students are not engaged in the f2f portion of the class. 

I prefer project-based education anyway, but tests and quizzes are necessary.  I usually don’t let those be more than 40%, if that much.  For myself, I have required tests and quizzes, but I do not expect them to be done without helps.  I decided early on to create tests and quizzes where helps would be encouraged or allowed, thus taking out of the picture the need for worrying about cheating, etc.  If I want a traditional dump-it-all on the scantron test, then I just give the tests in class.  If only one out of thirty cheats in an online test because the instructor expects totally personally work with no helps, then the testing is tainted. A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

Writing tests and quizzes that truly assess knowledge is the real challenge, I think.