On 1/5/2011 10:14 AM, Ron Nossaman wrote: > That's why I never liked multiple choice tests. My answer never was on > the list. <G> That happened to me a lot. <GRIN> I figured out how to reverse-engineer the tests. They were pretty simple-minded, the people who put those things together back in the 1950's and 1960's. They also seemed to think that they were invisible, that no one saw their hammy hands behind the architecture of the problems and answers. Usually the pattern was something like, "put in one really far-out answer, which is wrong. Then have two answers close together, and one of these is right. Make one more answer, like the two ones close to each other, but put it a little further away." Maybe for one question in a hundred the similar but more distant answer was right, but really it did just fine to choose one of the two which were close together. It was also a very fast way to get through it all, so there were no blanks. It wasn't hard work, either, and it felt good to address the exam with aggression <CRUNCH! So THERE!> <and one looked so innocent hunched over the exam sheet with one's two freshly sharpened #2 pencils.> Then I could use the extra time left over actually working out the more accessible problems, skipping around doing the least time-consuming first. The pencil marks for the machine-grading erased if I needed to change an answer. (Ah, the glow of nostalgia ... something which I actually could do well, amidst so many things I was bad at ...) Susan Kline -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110105/70eae6e3/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC