Tested & True: The University Exam

Some people think that universities should begin incorporating new methods of assessment, and move away from traditional exam and assignment style testing. But -hold on here- isn't university all about standardization? My personal experience lies with the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Waterloo, so let's start with that. 

You might ask - why is this fuss necessary in the first place? First, failure rates in UW Engineering have increased linearly in the past five years [1].  During this same period, the trend towards instant messengers, email, texting, and social networking has become increasingly more common among students aged 18-24 [2].  As students become more globally networked through social media sites, they have an increasing desire to individualize themselves, most often through creativity in their work.  If formal examinations were optimized for students of the past, they are certainly not optimized for today's creative, global students.  By adding alternative methods of assessment that reward creativity and communicative abilities to the traditional foundation of exams, students would be more engaged in learning, and their performance would increase.

UW Engineering should be highly concerned with this issue because it could have a significant effect on enrollment and retention of engineering students.  University applicants are discouraged from applying to a program if they feel they will not be able to perform well and may drop out.  In fact, enrollment rates in UW Engineering have already been consistently below the projected rates since 2005 [3], making them an area of concern for the Faculty.  Furthermore, the intention of UW Engineering is to produce capable graduates; if a large percentage of students are dropping out, there is room for improvement within this goal.  As people continue to evolve, UW will also lose its competitive edge if it does not adapt to the current needs of students.
By initiating a change in the way assessment is carried out, the UW Engineering Faculty could set an standard for other faculties and other universities, where assessment is based reactions to real-world problem solving and scenarios. Society will also benefit from engineering graduates that will be more enabled to tackle the problems they face after graduation, when there is no definite right answer to any given scenario.  Most importantly, alternative test methods would boost student engagement, performance, and morale.  Professors and teacher's assistants would likely also prefer to mark interesting, creative assignments and projects, rather than monotonous, repetitious exams and assignments.

The UW Faculty of Engineering has addressed the problem of rising dropout rates in their Vision 2010 Plan, but significant action has not yet been taken to change examination styles [1].  Some creative role-play projects already exist (i.e. the summative project in the first year "100" series course in many disciplines) where there is no fixed answer and students have to perform an analysis and determine what solution might work best to a given problem. Students generally prefer these types of projects to exams, and based on student consensus the average grades are considerably higher.  A creative project is also required in the fourth year of most engineering disciplines, but it is only mandatory for a single term.  I feel that adequate action has not yet been taken to address this issue, and that alternate methods of assessment should be implemented to help regain student interest and boost their performance.
Some professors argue making more changes to assessment methods would only lower expectations for students, and that if students 20 years ago could pass their exams, students today should still be able to pass them [1]. It is true that formal examinations have formed the basis for student assessment in the past; but just because something worked in the past, it doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement. For example, several of the most influential CEOs in the present world dropped out of university to follow their creative ambitions: Bill Gates (founder of Microsoft), Steve Jobs (co-founder of Apple), Michael Dell (founder of Dell Computer Corporation), David Filo and Jerry Yang (founders of Yahoo!), even Sergey Brin and Larry Page (founders of Google) [4].  These students obviously did not lack the intelligence, but rather they had to remove themselves from school so they could outlet their creativity. Typical formal exams primarily encourage memorization, and there is little room for personal creativity; often students can pass based on memorization alone, regardless of whether they're actually thinking about the material and its real importance.   As other schools have already begun to realize, students are often taught to take tests more often that they are simply taught [5].  Incorporating alternative methods of assessment into university testing should aim at alleviating the tendency towards memorization and rather should encourage creative thinking to retain more creative, intelligent students who would otherwise be constricted by the current system.

I believe that incorporating more alternate methods of testing in the Faculty of Engineering could significantly benefit the Faculty through increased student enrollment, retention, and satisfaction. So what should be done about it? In the end, it's the university's decision, and if anyone is willing to throw themselves forth into the future unknown, I think it's UW.

Here's my thoughts on how to begin:

1. A student poll should be conducted to collect students' suggestions on improved examination methods.  Any reasonable suggestions should be examined for feasibility and then the idea can be refined and a test-trial of the exam method can be tested on a small scale and feedback collected.  If the feedback is positive, the new exam method can begin to be incorporated on a larger scale.
2. Currently known methods of alternative testing, such as group role-plays and creative, open-ended projects, should be incorporated into more first and second year courses, when the dropout rates are the highest according to student consensus.  Initially, a smaller project could be incorporated at the 1B level, when students still have a low level of background knowledge, and a larger project could be incorporated at the 2B level, where students have gained a much high level of knowledge.  Students' opinions of the test methods should be gauged, as well as any resulting changes in dropout rates.
3. People within the Faculty of Engineering should be designated to research advanced teaching techniques, as well as innovative teaching methods already employed by other universities, as well as the success of failure of similar programs.  University examination methods should constantly be re-analyzed to cater to the needs of changing people and changing mindsets.