Teachers debate the efficiency of multiple choice only exams

February 24, 2010
By: Cori Lee Miller
Print This Post

Exams are easily the most stressful part of high school and this year was no exception for students at Bow Valley High School and Cochrane High.

This year’s diploma exams, written in January, marked the first time students completed all multiple choice tests in pure math, applied math, chemistry, biology, physics and science classes.

Diploma exams are worth 50 per cent of a student’s final mark and many were skeptical when the provincial government first announced the change this past September.

Alberta Teachers Association (ATA) president Carol Henderson said the changes were made without consulting teachers and that making 50 per cent of a students total mark dependent on an exclusively multiple choice exam was unfair.

Written portions of the exams allowed students to receive part marks on written answer questions, something multiple choice tests have done away with.

Teachers at both Bow Valley and Cochrane High said, for the most part, students had fairly positive reactions to the change, but they themselves have mixed feelings.

Teachers have the opportunity to go through the diploma exam one hour after students have completed it.

Carolyn McLeod, a Biology 30 teacher at Cochrane High, said she couldn’t speak for other teachers but “the Biology 30 was fairly easy, the students found it fairly easy.”

McLeod said some students were even second guessing their answers because the questions on the test seemed too easy.

“They probably knew more than they need to in order to answer that particular question,” she said.

When the change to diploma exams was announced in September, McLeod said the boys were “relieved,” but the girls “were quite upset.”

Also, some students who had studied hard and looked forward to long answer portions felt “like maybe they weren’t able to show what they knew,” McLeod said.

“That’s an area where some kids really, really shine.”

McLeod said long answer questions are usually where students can go all out, showing the amount of studying and effort they put into their exam preparation.

“So it kind of separates out the higher level students.”

McLeod said she had mixed feelings about the change.

“We feel good that we’ve prepared them so well but at the same time we wish we could showcase how strong they are.”

Bow Valley High School Biology 30 teacher Scott Allard said he didn’t have a tough time with the exam.

“I found the exam itself actually very easy compared to years past,” he said.

Allard said the exam’s simplicity had students wondering “am I being overconfident or did I just botch it.”

He said most the the students “were pretty happy,” with their performance.

Allard wanted to see some written elements remain for students more comfortable answering those types of questions.

“You take that away for them and so now they’re left with a portion that they are not as comfortable with,” he said, adding it’s even harder.

“It’s either right or it’s wrong and that’s tough for some of the kids.”

Teachers, Allard said, will now have the task of teaching students how to hit the books for strictly multiple choice tests.

“We’ll have to address the issue of how to properly study and how to properly analyze a multiple choice test as they’re going through it,” he said.

“It’s definitely something that I think all teachers are going to have to take a look at.”

Other teachers from Cochrane High and Bow Valley declined to speak on the subject.

No related stories.

  • Filed under News | Both comments and pings are currently closed.

One Response to “Teachers debate the efficiency of multiple choice only exams”

  1. Marty says:

    Wow, even as a university student the thought of a strictly multiple-choice high school biology diploma scares me. This should be changed, if students are encouraged to focus on retaining trivial facts for multiple choice exams, they will not be as prepared for writing lab reports in post-secondary schools.

Editor's Note: Comments that appear on the site are not the opinion of the Cochrane Eagle, but only of the comment writer. The Cochrane Eagle appreciates your comments, but keep 'em clean. Foul language and defamatory statements will not be permitted. The Eagle reserves the right to edit or delete the comments, which are intended to be a vehicle for community discussion. We also require that you share your name with Eagle readers.