[Kalibasa]

I'm wondering because I have now studied chemistry at two very different schools- I took my first year at a small liberal arts college and now I'm at a large state university. While I think I'm learning equally well both places (it all comes down to how many hours you are grinding out!), the exams are immensely different.  At my old school we had to show our work, we sometimes had to explain things in writing, and we could receive partial credit. The questions were straightforward but you had to prove that you knew what you were doing, and there was never a curve.

Here (at the university) the exams are mutliple choice, all-or-nothing questions laden with traps. (Of course we have an enormous curve.) I can somewhat see the value in it- it definitely makes you catch small errors, and after doing the practice problems you *know* your chemistry inside and out, exceptions included. But on the other hand it's a little bit frustrating, because I feel like the exams are rewarding luck and punishing those who aren't naturally good at trick questions. Many people are getting correct answers on questions that they guessed on (where they fully admit they didn't understand the concept), but are getting wrong answers on the topics they actually knew. In some cases knowing the material can make you worse off, because then if you don't see the trap you are led straight into the wrong answer instead of having the chance of a lucky guess.

I certainly do better under the first method, but I can see the advantages in both. So out of curiosity, which method do you think is better- the small school method or the large university method?

[JGK]

Generally, Im not a fan of the Multiple choice route unless it contains a penalty for guesswork.


Back in the day, when I did "O" Level Math at school in the UK. one of the papers contained traditional math problems and the other was Multiple Choice.

Calculators (non scientific models were cutting edge then) were not allowed, but you could use a slide rule.
The multiple choice paper was +1 for a correct answer and -1 for an incorrect choice.

the consequence was that to get a decent grade you had to know the methods in depth not just be able to punch buttons.

[danago]

I personally prefer the first way -- Having to explain things and show working. What ive found with many multiple choice tests is that questions (and given answers) are often slightly ambiguous and so the answer, within reason, could potentially be two of the given choices. At least with written answers, it is possible to explain my reasoning and state any assumptions or interpretations of the question.

[Ligander]

 At my institute Calculus and Linear Algebra exams contained some multiple-choice questions.
The point was that you could get the correct answer by doing a very long cosequence of standard math operations (or make a mistake and fail) or if you've really understood of what professor spoke about you could reject obviously incorrect answers e.g. even, negative, complex, function of x only and so on.