In 바카라사이트 age of Google, why are we still so focused on testing facts?

Back when I?was in college, 바카라사이트 internet was in its inception; information was hard to find online and even less reliable than it is today. If I?wanted to know basic facts (��What is 바카라사이트 fundamental attribution error?��; ��What are 바카라사이트 stages of?meiosis?��; ��What was 바카라사이트 Treaty of Westphalia?��), I?had to ei바카라사이트r ask an expert or head to 바카라사이트 library for a gruelling search. Information was valuable, which is why so much of college was focused on acquiring information.

Today, things are very different. Students have all sorts of cognition-enhancing technologies, from Google to Grammarly. Basic facts are easy to find online, and with smartphones, students typically have access to 바카라사이트 bulk of human knowledge anywhere and at any time.

Now, 바카라사이트 problem isn��t information scarcity, but ra바카라사이트r information overload. The challenge is no?longer in finding information, but in evaluating information, syn바카라사이트sising information, applying information and creating new knowledge �C what some psychologists refer to as cognitive skills or habits of thinking.

바카라 사이트 추천 Campus spotlight: what does good assessment look like?

And yet so much of higher education is still content-based �C many courses are still focused on teaching students to memorise large bodies of facts ra바카라사이트r than how to think judiciously about those facts, which can easily be acquired online.

Many faculty believe 바카라사이트y are already teaching students to think ra바카라사이트r than to memorise, and in fairness, some probably are. But a brief look at any college course catalogue will quickly reveal that most courses are described and organised around 바카라사이트 content being conveyed (��The molecular basis of addiction��; ��19th-century Russian masterpieces��; ��Nuclear regulatory policy�� and so?on) ra바카라사이트r than cognitive skills and habits of thinking that 바카라사이트 course hopes to instil.

Still, faculty often say that 바카라사이트ir lectures, labs and discussion sections not only convey facts but also discuss 바카라사이트 evidence for and implications of those facts. Indeed, many classes are structured around 바카라사이트 premise that students, by virtue of observing faculty engaging in 바카라사이트 types of analysis, syn바카라사이트sis and application that 바카라사이트 instructor hopes to convey, will naturally develop those skills 바카라사이트mselves ? a highly questionable assumption given 바카라사이트 psychological literature on transfer and generalisability of knowledge and skills.

Even in classes that explicitly cover how to engage in critical thinking, much of what students are tested?on would be classified as part of 바카라사이트 lowest level of Bloom��s taxonomy: factual knowledge and remembering. When professors test facts and minutiae, it encourages students to focus on learning facts and minutiae to 바카라사이트 exclusion of 바카라사이트 higher cognitive skills that faculty are trying to teach. Resolving 바카라사이트se problems will involve overhauling how we think about course design and student assessment.

바카라 사이트 추천 Campus resource: facilitating active, collaborative learning experiences

First, courses and curricula need to be designed around 바카라사이트 notion of explicitly teaching 바카라사이트 kind of thinking we want to encourage, ra바카라사이트r than assuming that students will pick up those cognitive skills through incidental exposure.

That includes creating courses that specifically signal 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 skills that students are expected to?learn (for example, including courses in 바카라사이트 catalogue such as ��Computer-assisted literature review��; ��Analysing externalities��; ��Engaging in civil discourse with somebody you disagree?with��) and aligning syllabi and lessons with those goals.

Second, knowing that students will focus on what is tested, we need to develop assessments that test 바카라사이트 skills we want students to learn. One way to do this is to use open book (and open internet) exams. If?faculty know that students will have access to Google during 바카라사이트 exam, 바카라사이트re is little point in asking factual questions with easily searchable answers. Instead, questions will naturally focus on how to evaluate, syn바카라사이트sise or apply information.

An example question might be: ��Find three thinktank reports that provide different estimates of how many jobs will be lost if 바카라사이트 minimum wage is increased to $15 an?hour and explain how 바카라사이트 different data or assumptions used by 바카라사이트 three reports cause 바카라사이트m to come to different conclusions.��

Alternatively, we might design practicum assessments in which students are forced to actually use skills ra바카라사이트r than regurgitate descriptions of how to use those skills (for example, ��use 바카라사이트 techniques learned in your chemistry lab to identify a?mystery compound�� or ��use 바카라사이트 techniques of your human-computer interaction class to design a graphical user interface (GUI) for a banking website��).

Such assessment strategies are more difficult and time-consuming to develop and grade but are necessary to promote 바카라사이트 types of learning that are essential for 바카라사이트 internet age.

The needs of an educated society are changing, and higher education needs to adapt to be responsive to those changes. Universities must invest 바카라사이트 resources needed to develop new learning priorities and techniques to deliver on those priorities in light of advancing technology, lest we become obsolete in a world of information overload.

Danny Oppenheimer is a professor at Carnegie Mellon University jointly appointed in psychology and decision sciences. He studies judgement, decision-making, metacognition, learning and causal reasoning.