-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
Quizork 2
This quizork did not go well at all. There are two main issues I saw:
-
The problem was too confusing for the first hypothesis test that they do on their own. Few realized that "better" meant "lower". For question 1, a few said that the variable was "convicted or not" but most said it was the number of convictions and all said it was quantitative. A problem where the variable is more obviously categorical would give them a better start.
-
They weren't ready to do a hypothesis test on their own. The concept of seeking evidence to contradict a null hypothesis didn't sink in right away after Helper-Hinderer, but most of them seemed to get it after the ESP activity. If we could rearrange things so they do both Helper-Hinderer and ESP before the quizork I believe they would learn it more effectively.
Most of them approached the quizork in completely incorrect ways. They weren't practicing the concepts we wanted them to know, so I don't think giving this assignment at this point was an effective use of their time.
Kenny, thanks for the feedback.
You may well be correct that they need more practice before doing a hypothesis test on their own, but I will throw out another idea. When we do things in class -- whether you lecture and write on the board, or they follow through a step-by-step activity -- it all seems easy and they think they understand it better than they really do. It might sound mean, but I think we need to set up some traps or pitfalls for them so that they have to stop and say to themselves, "Gee, I don't understand this as well as I thought I did." We hope that they then back up and look to see what they missed. Some people call these "teachable moments". Jim Robison-Cox
BTW, I don't think this wiki format is conducive to discussions and plan to switch us to a google group forum. Thanks for trying it out so we could see how it looks.