There are ways to make a good examination that has subjective content and thoughtfulness with multiple choice tests (that is to what I think this “objectivity” refers). It takes a great deal of effort. As one example, imagine having a student read four passages from books or journal articles that they were not assigned, but that reflect the ideas of a philosopher, literary person or historian that was assigned. If they’ve read widely and recognize the quotation, they will get the right answer. Good for them. If they have studied the text and realize from the subject matter that Freud, say, could not have written one of the passages, good, they’ve narrowed down the answer. If they studied the ancillary matter and so know that the idea of “stream of consciousness” comes from James, say, they can, similarly get the right passage. Moreover, they will have learned a great deal about how to think in the process. In other words, taking an exam would not be like throwing up what has been forced down your throat; but more like thinking things through at a higher level than one could do before taking the course.

I would like to start creating a series of questions in tests: one would choose what one would think would be the right preliminary answer which would lead to another question and so on. At some point, one could go back and start again. In other words, I would like to find a better way to make tests less like monuments to memorization; and more like a continuation of learning.

The selection by the teacher of the answers is very, very difficult because, making these kinds of tests is an art that is one of the most demanding creative arts of online teaching.

Finally, students are right to fear subjective tests because they ARE subjective! We all remember the teacher who gave the A-minus because we neglected to dot an i.

The question here honestly is a larger one. Subjective exams online basically means you can stretch college courses to anyone in any part of India. Hence, i can stay at home, log onto a portal, listen to lectures online, read e-books, and give my subjective exam online. The biggest fear i guess people feel is how do we monitor fair practices. This means you have to go to a nearby affiliation center. We all know the authenticity of such places.

Another fear most lecturers and teachers have is that technology will make them redundant. This is false but that is how technology is positioned. People will never admit this,but that is the case in a lot of cases. Trainers feel e-learning is making them redundant and teachers feel same about technology. Nothing is further from the truth. These are just mediums that can make their job easier. Unless we change the way these technologies are positioned we will encounter resistance.

An alternative to online subjective testing is something like the UK OCR where a PDF of the hard copy A-level exam paper is downloaded onto their Scoris system for online marking. I would think online answering is then but a short step away but, as Akshay says, you would need to verify that no cheating is taking place. The problem is therefore less one of process or technology but integrity. Otherwise the value of the qualification would be in jeopardy.

By definition, subjective assessment cannot be objective. Therefore it may be possible for all delivery mechanisms (questions, answers, results) to be online, but the actual evaluation must be done by a person, not a software program. Yes, yes, computers can even play grandmaster level chess. But context sensitive analysis (which computers routinely perform, and Meg Tufano’s first para implies) is not the same as subjective assessment. Having said that, I must acknowledge that most testing these days is not subjective, and taking all of it online would be a huge step forward.

@Akshay: Yes, they fear being made redundant, but they are wrong, aren’t they? In India, the war for talent is fiercest in the education sector, at every level from KG to PhD. A good teacher need never fear a lack of openings. Compensation is another matter.

@Roland: Agreed, it is about integrity. But with even a paper-only mechanism being vulnerable to the “exam jockey” system, online is not very much worse off. Apart from saving a tree or three, it guarantees post-exam security which the paper system can’t.

@Reetika: Interesting subject. Now I’m off to look for that next post you promised.

Thanks for your comments, everyone.

Meg, your example illustrates just how challenging it is to design online tests. I suspect tech-averse teachers may stay completely clear! That being said, I was pleasantly surprised with some of our research findings in this area. The majority of university/exam board decision makers were actually of the view that their faculty and staff will welcome any new learning technology, and they didn’t expect any hesitation during implementation. Although, some did mention the need for proper training in using these systems.

Cheating and security issues are one of the biggest challenges in the university system IMHO (if not the biggest). While security protocols are defined for online as well as offline exam systems, the opportunistic are usually relentless in the search for loopholes in both! But as Arvind suggests, online exams do have a one-up in terms of post-exam security.

@Arvind – Soon! I’m working on an already promised post from a previous mention. Thanks for watching out!