Bill Purvis wrote in part:
>There is a big con to literally open-book exams: Students incline
>to spend lots of exam time plowing hopefully through the book. I
>observed that particularly in introductory biology--during the exams. I would
see dozens of students poring through stuff I knew wouldn't help 'em.>
Dead on, Bill. But my experience is that this attitude (ignoring the students
with severe, permanent, rectal-cranial inversion) doesn't last more than
about one exam.
Further, closed book exams punish skills that life rewards -- planning, prior
studying, organization, studying for concepts vs. memorizable trivia, etc.
I remember a Chem teacher who covered up the periodic table. Apparently
expected us to memorize the thing. This really encourages teachers to write
idiotic questions (What is the atomic number of Effluvium?") instead of good
stuff ("Why is the atomic numbert of Effluvium 4.7?")
And as a matter of fact, with practice, open book questions are easier to
write than closed book questions.
Go for it!
Quent
