To think that they need more information regarding an exam at uni?

[00100001]

So, if you sat a 30 credit university module and you were told "you will be given a 45 minute multiple choice test" this is to be satin 2 months time.

Would that be enough information for you to adequately prepare?

Written exams and essays are far easier than MCQs.

You don’t get negative marking on essays or written exams

You don’t get 19% knocked off the total score because that’s the amount they calculated in their “correction for guessing”

I was getting 80+ in written exams, essays, lab reports.

I failed every single MCQ, had to resit them and only scored 51% as my highest score.

I managed not to get a score below zero in any of the MCQs, but knew people who did.

I found essays far easier too. With essays you can generally hit the mark and pick up points even if you’re really not sure about the matter being tested. I always chose written answers to calculations of MQC (although tbf MCQ were the compulsory part for us)

I realised too late how exams are all about technique- you need the syllabus and past papers and a refined plan and technique.

Most important lesson I’ll be teaching my children when it comes to exams

I don' think it's unreasonable to expect to know which topics will be tested my degreee involved distinct subject areas and it would have been odd in the extreme not to know which one was being tested.

If I was doing a history degree for example that covered 17th, 18th and 19th Century I would expect to be told which century the test was on (just an example, no need to tell me that's not how history degrees work )

I think you need to push for as much extra information that you can get

I realised too late how exams are all about technique- you need the syllabus and past papers and a refined plan and technique.

This is why I got a 1st and DH (same course, similar ability, better work ethic) got a 2:1.

Look at the course specification, it will be published somewhere. Dd didn't get pass paper ms but the spec was on the website, everyone is in the same boat

I realised too late how exams are all about technique- you need the syllabus and past papers and a refined plan and technique.

Yes to this.

My first degree I knew the subject pretty well, but bombed all my exams. Redid the degree course at my then employers expense then a masters, averaging above 70% each time. The main difference? Practice exams and analysing the probability of question types/ subject.

You simply cannot memorise an entire course worth of information. You NEED practice and for that you need past papers.

"Just learn everything on the course" is not necessarily very helpful advice depending on the subject and the course structure. For example, in my degree each course consisted of a series of broad brush lectures over the entire year, the content of which would vary based on the interests of the lecturers delivering it (so if the Civil War specialist was on sabbatical the year you did the course you wouldn't get that lecture), and via tutorials and essays you would focus in on 6-8 topics within the period. These topics would be chosen within your tutorial group and the detail would be guided by our own research so each group would end up covering completely different things in different ways.

If someone had announced that we would be assessed on European History 1500-1800 via a multiple choice test and not provided any examples of the type of questions that would be asked or a guide to the subject areas covered there would have been outrage. It is literally impossible to "know" everything about European History 1500-1800 at university level. I suppose you could memorise some lists of dates and kings and battles but that's not what the subject is about and frankly it would make the degree worthless.

Well, I don't see the problem here. Of course you will have to know everything that's been covered in the course. That's the point of the course!

I agree. If the were going to tell you what was on the test, what’s the point of teaching anything else on the course?

I have no Idea if I need to remember regulations 'to the letter', or just over arching ideas

So, you’ve no idea if you actually need to bother learning what they have given you to learn or whether you can skim read it?

If I’m relying on somebody who has told me they have a degree in something I’d rather hope they learned the detail and not the headlines.

I just wrote a professional practice exam that was 100 questions based on a 670 page book. No additional guidance beyond that.

I don't know what else you want - learn the material, get tested on the material...

If someone had announced that we would be assessed on European History 1500-1800 via a multiple choice test and not provided any examples of the type of questions that would be asked

Which is why they wouldn’t asses that subject in this way.

You need to know everything

This was like our exams at uni, vague topics, no past papers or sample questions, although the majority were written 3hr exams not multiple choice.

It was incredibly hard because there were vast vast subject areas, literally 2 exams testing an entire years worth of lectures. If you hadn't been putting the work in throughout the year you were fucked.

But you just had to know everything, after the first year you just learnt to put in the work throughout the year. So up to date notes, weekly revision sessions etc. So you knew it and then starting about 12 weeks before exams up your revision

It was difficult because up to uni I definitely learnt my exams based on technique, but you couldnt do it for these. It was pure knowledge and tbh the course completely wrecked my mental health, I wouldnt recommend it to anyone. For one exam though you will be fine

I’m guessing you’re quite young, Op. from my experience of working in secondary schools pupils are given a LOT of guidance on what will come up on mock exams all the way through. Eg for English literature I have seen pupils instructed to “revise specifically the character of Lady Macbeth” or “pay particular attention to the relationship between Lady Macbeth and her husband when you are revising for the mock.”

It’s total spoon feeding, and pupils often get a shock during the real exam when they are confronted which questions which don’t quite fit with the “practice questions” they have prepared for and they panic.

I did GCSEs when they first came out in the late 1980s so there was no list of past papers to wade through on the Internet to see what came up every year. And then at A-level we didn’t have access to many papers at all. Our teachers brought some in to class a month or so before the A-levels and we had to pass them around the class quickly to look at the whole thing briefly before the teacher picked a couple out to do on the board.

It seems completely different now in terms of how much advance information is available to pupils for exam prep at pre-university level. I think they get a shock to find it doesn’t quite work in the same way at university.

Students could be better prepared by unis though, I think. They could be samples of answers that received certain grades so at least students would know what they were looking for, how much depth to go into.

I think I just basically churned out everything I had learned for each module and have subsequently forgotten nearly all of it!

That’s university. Everyone is in the same boat - no spoon feeding, it’s a test of your Intellect and knowledge.

Go to class, read around your subject. (Grow up??😊)

It doesn’t sound like the education system has done you many favours.

I think this is a great opportunity to to challenge yourself and move outside your comfort zone. The working world will not be easy, and if you want to succeed you Will need to have confidence in your ability, and think on your feet.

"So, you’ve no idea if you actually need to bother learning what they have given you to learn or whether you can skim read it?"

I know the topics, but the module subject is so very broad... I am and do read, and have an average of 93% across all modules. I'm not an idiot, nor am I expecting to know exactly what is in the exam.

It's just with this particular module, the topic is so broad and ... vague... It really is difficult for me to know what to expect from this exam. I can "learn everything" but there is no way to "learn everything" it's like saying "learn everything about cars...and then answer a MCQ on cars."

But its ok. IABU, I will ask nicely for some sample questions, and if nothing comes if it... just see what the heck I'm presented with on test day...

I just want to point out, I'm 38. Not young. And have never once had an exam or test in any environment without prior knowledge of roughly what to expect from the exams...
Not has work been difficult as a result of this... I work in IT and nobody, not one person, would expect me to "learn everything" off by heart.

🍀

GCSE, A-level, professional qualifications, driving test, addition qualifications.... every module test up until now.... Have always had practice questions/sample papers.

So, sorry if the entire education and training world has "failed" me and not done me any favours.. this one situation is the exception to everything I've experienced.

A module has course content and objectives (almost always available in a handbook or on the online system).

Students attend lectures and seminars, make course notes, read the reading list so they have a good knowledge of the area.

Student goes into an exam and shows their knowledge.

I didn't get sample papers for any of my university courses.

it's like saying "learneverythingabout cars...and then answer a MCQ on cars."
It isn't though, because a module wouldn t be 'learn everything out there on cars from engineering and product design to catalytic converters to key cars of an era and the social status of cars'.

The exam will be what you've covered in university sessions and the set reading

but the module subject is so very broad...

It may well be a broad subject, but what has been taught in your lectures and seminars? That's what you need to learn.

But university is supposed to be teaching you how to think, so telling you "this is exactly what you need to know" misses the point. School and professional qualifications aren't comparable. You need to start taking responsibility for making sure you know your subject - everything that's been covered, and is on the lecture slides, or in the tutorials - rather than expecting the questions to be handed to you on a plate.

And lecturers at my uni were discouraged from making practice papers available, because students then complained if the real exam included questions or areas that weren't in the practice papers!

We are a similar age. While I had examples for gcse and a level, I didn’t always at university - undergrad and post grad.

For me university wasn’t about learning facts by heart - that wouldn’t be possible. It was about understanding the topic and having a wide knowledge of the subject being covered in the module.

I assume the test isn’t on ‘IT’ or ‘accounting’ But on a specific (and narrowly defined) module?

Have you spoken to your lecturer to explain your concerns - I suspect you will be told everyone is in the same boat and you should know the subject well by reviewing the material being taught - but if you feel you don’t have enough information to sit a test on the module - then surely the l cutter has totally failed?

I'd feel the same about multiple choice in my upcoming law degree. I did multiple choice for parts of the gcse I did recently but that is a much lower level. I can't visualise what sort of detail they'd want in multiple choice. Like would it be down to "which sub section of the 1997 law on x contains y". Or something more broad? I can see how it works in maths where you calculate a discrete answer from the question. But not for more wordy style degrees.