Should Students Be Penalized for Irrelevant Mistakes on Tests?
Whether students should be penalized for mistakes not directly related to the concept being tested depends on several factors. If part of the overall course objective includes the learning and application of good study and test-taking skills, what appears irrelevant may not actually be so. The teacher's objectives are crucial here. If exercising good study and testing skills is part of the course objectives, the teacher must make that clear to the class.
The clarity of testing instructions is also important. Are procedural instructions given clearly, unambiguously, and illustrated if appropriate? If the directions are written, is there extra attention given to reading-impaired students to ensure they understand? Is the penalty for common mistakes, such as mislabeling math problems, clearly stated?
The stakes of the testing play a significant role as well. If stakes are high, such as passing or failing a grade level based on the test outcome, concept-irrelevant mistakes should be penalized lightly, if at all. Retaining a student should be based on their understanding of concepts, not their ability to follow directions precisely. If stakes are low, such as a lower grade on a report card, procedural errors may be penalized more strongly to reflect the formal and informal objectives of the class.
Test-Taking Skills Every Student Should Learn
Some test-taking skills are essential, regardless of the quality of the test. Students must learn to read or listen to directions carefully and follow them precisely. Any skill that helps students avoid construct-irrelevant mistakes is worthwhile.
Good test-taking skills:
- removing mental and physical distractions
- approaching the test with a positive attitude
- reading directions carefully
- asking for clarification if any directions seem unclear
- checking answers for mistakes
- passing over difficult items to return to them later if time permits
Skills Designed to Exploit Poorly Designed Tests
Some skills take advantage of the weaknesses of poorly designed tests:
- looking for clues from other test items
- identifying options that are obviously different from the other alternatives
- eliminating grammatically inconsistent options
- using elimination as cues for matching and multiple-choice items
If a test exhibits flaws that a good test-taker can exploit, the responsibility lies with the test, not the student. Such skills can hardly be considered unethical.
Guessing Skills
Guessing skills include the following:
- eliminating distractors determined to be incorrect
- using partial knowledge to identify possible correct answers
- relying on hunches and first impulse responses
- randomly selecting answers if out of time or with a complete lack of knowledge
Guessing skills are completely ethical. A good test will take guessing into account and try to minimize its effect. Guessing can reflect partial skill or knowledge, which is directly relevant to the concept being tested. A good test should not forbid guessing in any form, as no struggles of conscience should add to the stress of taking the actual test.
Randomly marking answers is usually discouraged, as test designers intend for students to read the problem, but it may be difficult to identify unless the student marks interesting patterns on their answer sheet.
Cheating
Cheating is not a skill; it is a moral failure that undermines the validity of the test. Cheating produces grades that do not reflect the student’s actual knowledge. It is not the fault of the test designer, although there are ways to combat cheating in test design and administration.
Cheating can take several forms:
- obtaining prior unauthorized knowledge of test content
- copying answers from another test-taker
- bringing "cheat sheets" to the test
- unauthorized review of study materials during the test
- exceeding time limits
- using calculators when not permitted
- using phones or other devices to get unauthorized help from others
Cheating should not be taught nor tolerated in any educational environment.