I was cheated. I was cheated when I was in school, not by my classmates but by the very exams that were supposed to measure my ratings and academic performance.
Grade 1: Math Subject
We were given an exam on multiplication. Part 1 was a timed exam due within 5 minutes. We were supposed to answer a set of items such as 8 multiplied by four and 7 times 51 using mental math. No calculators were allowed.
With a snap of a finger, the teacher shouted, “Finished or not finished, pass your papers.” I was hesitant to do so. I was not finished with ten items to fill up. But, hell, I had to move on to part 2.
The second part was easy. No time pressure. You just have to solve the problems given. For example: Your father gave you a daily allowance of 100 pesos. How much will you be able to save in a week after spending 65 pesos a day?
The teacher checked the papers and after a day we were informed of our grades. I was given a perfect score for part 2 but the results of part 1 were devastating. Bottom line, I failed the test because part 1 had more items and thus had more bearing.
I was cheated that day. I felt that part 1 should have less bearing on exam. Why? Because part 1 is not a math exam. It doesn’t measure how good you are in applying mathematical principles. It just tests how good you are in memorizing the multiplication table.
I was not just cheated in math. I was consistently cheated in my other subjects due to the traditional belief that memory retention is the ultimate measure of academic success as thus success in later endeavors.
High School: History Subject
I was given an exam. The first part was enumeration. I had to write down names of Filipino Heroes. There was a question: Who was the Filipino hero who killed Magellan? I was tempted to answer Lapu Lapu because that was written in the history book that we were asked to memorize. I didn’t answer Lapu Lapu. Why? Because I believe he was not a Filipino in the first place. There was no national identity back then, only tribal identity.
This is just my opinion and I may be wrong. What bothers me is not just that we are expected to memorize what is written in our textbooks but that we are also expected to believe what’s written as if it was the ultimate truth.
I’m sure you can relate to what I am saying: that one time or another, we are expected to memorize and believe what our teachers and textbooks say. We are taught to believe that what’s written in our textbooks are ultimate truths and that memorizing these texts will make us succeed later in life. This is misleading because wrong measures lead to wrong results.
If we make our children memorize the multiplication table instead of making them understand the application of mathematical principles, we are inhibiting their learning and analyzing skills, making them good memory chips but poor mathematicians. If we strictly enforce the ideas of our social science textbooks to our children as if these were ultimate truths, we are prohibiting them to think independently.
Yes, the educational system sucks and we are all cheated. But the fact that you are reading this article right now is a proof that you keep an open mind and that you search for learning beyond the classroom walls of traditional education. You reflect on what you do and why you do it or why you believe what you believe. Instead of asking what, when and where, you ask the more important questions of how and why. How we all wish others would ask these questions too.
We are freethinkers. We were cheated once before and we do not want to be cheated again.
i strongly agree that memorization is overvalued in today's educational system. true, it was of greater importance back then when mental processes had to be done exclusively by humans. nowadays, however, we have the capability to delegate these computations to automated machines. in this light, we have to shift the weight from memorization to problem solving.
Schools today excel in imparting knowledge, but are woefully pitiful when it comes to imparting wisdom.
oh yeah!
I'm more used to the noun version.
I'm having my practice teaching now.
Well, an atheist teacher here…
@wes, you got it right!
By the way I have terrible memory too. I can't even remember my ex-boyfriends' names.( Just kidding)
http://www.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Bloom/blooms_tax… http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloo… http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom%27s+and+ICT…
I just noticed, I mistakenly edited/deleted the understanding part which should be the fifth. Remembering is still at the bottom.
@shella, What's your source of revised bloom's taxonomy.?
i remember that math problems
i took such a test in 4th year HS, 50 items (10 items per topic; +, -, *, /, mixed)
ex: 2+6+4+9+2 = ?, 7=4-9*2/4 = ?
but the teacher gave us 10 minutes, got 42..
i became a bit good in math coz my elem ath teacher used to bng our head in the blackboard f e failed to answer board problems… ^_^
—–
on the lapu lapu thingy, my advic, if you don't agree with what's written in the book, tell your teacher but when it coes to exams, use the books then conveniently forget about it after the exams
but i HATE ENUMERATION!!!!
@chris: perhaps you're going about this the wrong way. I understand your frustration about having to be tested on memorization more than analysis, but that usually comes only during the foundational courses. You have to start somewhere. Application comes later. Every field of knowledge needs the foundations of basic facts with which to play around with. Memorization in the first few intro courses are inevitable. But that gradually changes when go to the advanced grad courses where its mostly application.
Doctors need to memorize all the mechanics and symptoms of every disease before they can make accurate diagnosis, lawyers need to memorize every law and previous court case before proceeding to case studies… its the same for every specialization. Even martial artists need to learn the basic katas and repeat them over and over again until they can do it automatically. Memorize fundamentals first, then apply what you learned afterwards.
Don't jump the gun, you'll get to that sooner or later. Its not a case of one being more important than the other. Everyone has to go through the memorization phase to get good building blocks of what comes after. When you reach grad school, there'll be less memorization and more analysis work.
re the grade 1 math problem
it seems the problem was time pressure, not the memorization per se.
the word problem is multiplication: daily saving X 7days/week.
Interesting ted talk video on creativity! btw
Thanks for pointing that out.
Let me clarify further.
The problem is timed because of the assumption that the student will be able to quickly recall the meaning of the material the more one repeats it. It is based on the "rote" style of learning.
right.
so the problem is the mistaken assumption that quickness has something to do with memorization.
memorization per se is not the problem
after all, how could u have solved the word problem without knowing the multiplication tables?
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ken_robinson_sa…
one of my favorite TED talks.
Again, I beg to disagree to what you claim the memorization is overvalued in our educational system as a whole.
– Again, here is the claim I posted above… that in a traditional educational system, memorization is overvalued in our grading systems.
It is just a part, I repeat a part for elementary students Grades 1 to 2. Do you expect kids to analyze Math at a very young age? Not everyone is Einstein.
– Try asking a child to buy candy from a convenience store. Give a certain amount that will incur change. That’s problem solving for a grade school student.
Is memorization of multiplication table included in highscool grading system? No.
– Of course not, that is why the example above is in gradeschool. Gradeschool – Math Subject; Highschool – History Subject.
I haven’t heard any teacher who have successfully designed math exams that measures the students’ memory than their analytical skills.
– Read the article above, the example is there.
What I mean is, memorization in Math is just a very very small part and I don’t believe with what you claim that memorization is overvalued in Mathematics subjects because I am a Math teacher myself.
– When a math test gives more bearing on the memorization of multiplication table than problem solving, memorization becomes overvalued. That is my claim.
Force fed? Didn’t you hear your teacher ask “Are there any questions”
– Again, this is not a rant about teachers. This is about the traditional educational system which bases rewards on memorization than understanding even though the subject matter is about analysis than memorization.
– You are right when you point out that there are only a few who dares to ask, “Are there any questions?” The question is why is this so? Is it because the system bases rewards on memorization? Is it because they are contented with the answer given, thinking that is better to memorize then understand because memorization yields more grades?
– When does it become force fed? When the grades come to play. When it showed that the system rewards those who memorize rather more than those who understand. When the student comes into the conclusion he is better off memorizing than understanding.
– It is sad to think that a student gets more points for memorization rather than understanding. It is sad to think that the system for grading is more on memorization rather than understanding. It is sad to think that a student didn’t even bother to ask the question.
Is it the failure of the educational system that not all of the students have inquisitive minds?
– When students don’t ask why, is it because they are not inquisitive? Or is it because they vicariously experience that the system rewards is not based on inquisitiveness. Isn’t it both? Isn’t education is a 2 way. Would it be better if all students are inquisitive? Would it be better if inquisitiveness is valued more than memorization. Can we do something if the student is naturally uninquisitive? Maybe or maybe not. Can we do something about tradition educational system? Yes, we can encourage students by putting more premium on understanding and less on memorization.
Memorization is force fed in science? Oh my!
– Science becomes force fed when “We are focused on the questions what, where instead of the probing questions how and why. In effect we are given better grades for memorizing than understanding even if science is a continous inquiry, discourse and study.” That is my claim.
– I didn’t put pure science in the article. But we both agree that science is more than memorization. However, if science grades are more based on what, where than how and why, its becomes force fed.
Again, do we expect everyone to do conduct his own study?
– Again, Science becomes force fed when “We are focused on the questions what, where instead of the probing questions how and why. In effect we are given better grades for memorizing than understanding even if science is a continous inquiry, discourse and study.”
– There is no mention that everyone should conduct a study.
Because individuals have different interests. We cannot expect everyone to be freethinking like us. Some are contented to what is put into their mouth. Some eat the meal themselves. And some took time to prepare their own meals.
– And those “who eat the meal themselves and who took time to prepare their own meals” should be given better grades than “those who are contented to what is put into their mouths.”
– Those who analyzed and understood should be given better grades than those who merely understand.
– It seems that you agree with me on this.
I am happy that you are passionate about the issue here being a math and science teacher. We both agree that understanding is more important than memorization. I assume that you also agree with me that tests should give more premiums on analysis than memorization.
Again, this is not about a rant on teachers.
This is about the traditional educational system which values memorization over understanding as implied in exams given as examples. This is also about asking the important questions how and why-the same questions that you are asking me. For that I am honoured. As a teacher I am sure you’d also be honoured when a student as you those important questions too.
Yes, frank your right those two are different.
Heres the context:
Memorizing the multiplication table is within the context of grading systems that overvalues memorization over analyzation when math is suposedly more of an analytical study.
Memorization of force fed ideas is within the context of history and sciences wherein we focus on memorization and we blindly accept such as truths. We are focused on the questions what, where instead of the probing questions how and why. In effect we are given better grades for memorizing than understanding even if science is a continous inquiry, discourse and study.
I'm all for analysis and essay type questions. Like you, I sucked terribly at memorization and always got top marks with essay types. I bitched and moaned constantly about how memorization was a large part of tests, and blamed the system repeatedly for my failing grades.
That being said, I have no qualms now of having been made to memorize the multiplication table, or national heroes, or the scientific names of tropical crops, or all the regions of the Philippines, or the periodic table, or the exact date this and that was invented, discovered or destroyed.
If I had students I would make them memorize a dozen or so things too, because although I don't remember everything I ever memorized, there are some things that do stick – things I'm better at remembering than others – and I am made aware of where my strength lies. Hopefully the same can be said of those I would teach. Perhaps some might find it useful to know how far apart they must plant each kind of crop. Perhaps some discover their potential for running numbers through their head faster than it would take to type them. And perhaps some might find it important to be able to list every illness that presents as a headache.
Understanding a point, solving problems and defending an opinion are very important, which is why we have essays and problem solving portions in our tests. But memorization is important too, which is why we have enumeration.
p.s. There is a difference between memorizing from a list and accepting something as gospel truth. It would have helped if you had made this distinction.
This!
Memorizing the multiplication table is withing the context of the grading system- yes I agree. But it is not the only thing graded. It is just a part, I repeat a part for elementary students Grades 1 to 2.Do you expect kids to analyze Math at a very young age? Not everyone is Einstein.
Is memorization of multiplication table included in highscool grading system? No.Because higschool students are graded in Mathematics on how they analyse worded problems. I haven't heard any teacher who have successfully designed math exams that measures the students' memory than their analytical skills.
Moreso when it comes to college, critical thinking is needed to pass the subjects. I went to an engineering school with lots of Math then and there. Were we asked to memorize? Maybe, some of the formulas for Solid Mensuration,Trigonometyr,Integral and Differential Calculus, Advance Mathematics, Statistics – but those formulas can be derived with analysis. It would be easier for engineering students to memorize the formula that they have previously derived from analysis, then use it readily than derive them everytime.
What I mean is, memorization in Math is just a very very small part and I don't believe with what you claim that memorization is overvalued in Mathematics subjects because I am a Math teacher myself.
"Memorization of force fed ideas is within the context of history and sciences wherein we focus on memorization and we blindly accept such as truths. "
Force fed? Didn't you hear your teacher ask "Are there any questions" How many of your classmates raised their hands and ask to clarify the validity of the ideas you've just heard? A very few dares to ask not because they are afraid that teacher might fail them, it's just that they are contented to what the teacher said.
Is it the failure of the educational system that not all of the students have inquisitive minds?
Memorization is force fed in science? Oh my! I took a lot of sciences back then. Principles are taught in chemistry and physics and we accept hose principles because they are backed-up with laboratory experiments that prove the validity of those principles.
Teaching science by force-fed memorization? Maybe in Biology but not all sciences. Chemistry is composed of science and math. Memorizing the periodic table? yes, we asked students memorize but not the entire table, only most important elements which are commonly encountered in solving chemical reactions quantitatively.
In physics we are asked to memorize some laws of motions but do we stop there? No? We used these laws of motions to calculate the force/energy exerted by these moving bodies. Can we solve th kinetic energy of a moving car travelling at a speed with just using what we memorized? It still needs analytical thinking.
I know these things because I am a science teacher.
If someone is not contented with what the teacher or the books says. Then he must himself, conduct his own study on the areas which he doubts. There is nothing wrong with it. This action led to the discoveries of many things that debunk the currently accepted ideas.
Again, do we expect everyone to do conduct his own study? No. Because individuals have different interests. We cannot expect everyone to be freethinking like us. Some are contented to what is put into their mouth. Some eat the meal themselves. And some took time to prepare their own meals.
Again, I beg to disagree to what you claim the memorization is overvalued in our educational system as a whole.
Analyzing is, indeed, more important than memorization.
I want to point out though that the issue here is not about whether memorization is important or not.
The issue here is that in a traditional educational system, memorization is overvalued in our grading systems.
It is true as you pointed out that some students learn fast, some slow and some not at all; some in memorization, some in analysis, some in both. However, it is the educational system that makes the call, which is should be graded more.
If you are good in memorization that does not mean that you should be graded more in memorization than analyzing. If you are good in analyzing that does not mean that you should be graded more in analyzing than memorization. The valuation of learning is based on the subject and not the person. In math, for example, solving problems should have more bearing than the memorization of the multiplication table because math is about problem solving and analyzing.
Another thing is that the valuation of grade systems is not a question of who is at fault? Who is to be blamed? It’s a question of what is faulty in the system.
Let me answer your question:
Should we say students before our century were cheated by their teachers? Should we say Dalton cheated his students by declaring that atom is indeed indivisible?
– When they blindly accept and memorize to get good grades rather than learn, students cheat themselves into thinking that they are better off than those who bother to examine, analyze and evaluate.
– No, when they go beyond memorization and find time to understand and ask the important questions of why and how. If I were Dalton, I would be very happy to have a student to asks why and how than to have a student who just memorized what I said. Dalton’s study would be a dead end if everyone just blindly accepts.
– Absolutely, yes! If the teacher said the atom is indivisible, he disagrees, gave a good evidence and given bad grades for such.
I agree that both social science and pure science is a continuous study. An accepted truth today may not be different tomorrow. Because of such, the more we should always be prepared to analyze and to ask the questions how and why; the more we should encourage students to do so. If we don’t… if we just blindly accept memorized force fed ideas, I doubt there will be new discoveries for science.
I am not ranting about my teachers. I am ranting about the prevalent educational system that is based on the traditional thinking that students who are good in memorization and blindly obey are to be rewarded by teachers.
On my opinion, critical thinking and problem solving is more important than memorization. I would rather prefer a history student who’s good in discussing the history and pressing issues of a particular nation than a history student who’s can recite the capitals of the world in alphabetical order in memory. I would rather prefer a math student who can solve practical math problems than a math student who can recite the multiplication table in memory, blindfolded and with his hands tied.
I would rather prefer a student who understood rather than a student who memorized. I would rather be on a school that will make me understand rather than a school that will make me memorize.
"re: math – it’s as much a question of speed as it is understanding the formulas. take a marathon for example, everyone knows how to run but its the fastest runner than gets the glory. it would be unfair to your other classmates who practiced more to get the same grade as those who just barely understood the concept."
I disagree on this. Mathematics greatly values abstract and critical thinking way more than memorization.
"history – as much as we’d like to inject a little lateral thinking into the classroom, its also a bitch to check and grade papers that are all essay-type questions where the students have more room to reason out and show their creative thinking. But there’s also too much room for subjectivity when there’s no one specific correct answer. constant accusations of unfair grading, favoritism… will make any teacher just stick to objective-type questions."
True. It is indeed difficult to grade essay type test and there are issues involved when it comes to the grading. However, I still stand that history textbooks should not be memorized and accepted as ultimate truths. History is a narrative of the past. It is an objective investigation of patterns of cause and effect that determines past events. History is an analysis, a debate, a discourse. History is not about memorization and blind acceptance.
"look, learning is a 2-way street. my advice: if you have any complaints on the teaching style, help the teacher help you. suggest to your prof better ways to conduct the class instead of just bitching about it (and you even get to practice your negotiation and diplomatic skills too, an important thing to have in the real world)"
Exactly! Education is supposed to be a 2 way thing but if an educational system in based memorizing forced feed ideas, it becomes 1 way. That is why we should ask the important questions of why and how rather than merely accepting the what, when and where – the ideas that were supposed to be memorized. And by your advice, you seem to agree with me.
Again, I am not ranting about my teachers. For all I know, this kind of thinking has been imposed and passed to them by tradition. I myself, has been apart of this educational system who give more merits for memorization rather than understanding. But that obstacle will not impede learning. That is, if we think that our learning through understanding is more important than the grades we get from memorizing forced feed ideas.
I am not an education graduate but I've been teaching college subjects for two years now and somehow have experience in imparting knowledge and measuring students' learning.
Before I continue, I want to clarify that my views are of a college instructor and not of an elementary or highschool teacher. Different levels need different types of teaching and learning measurements. So if there are teachers out there kindly comment, object or criticize my opinions regarding our educational system.
Regarding your sentiment on Math , you were given a two-part exam right? First is a time-pressured mental math and the last is a no-time pressure problem solving. The first part was given not just to determine how much a student know in multiplication but also how quick they could do it. Giving pressure on time will not accurately measure how much someone knows but it reflects how someone would react or deal with a situation. Example, in multiple problems regarding mental math, we can inspect at a glance what are the easy and difficult ones. If one chooses to answer all the easy ones first he would have a greater chance of answering more questions than the one who starts with difficult items. That is what we call technique.
I agree that students should be taught more of application of mathematical principles. But to be really good in application -like problem solving , one should know the principles first. But knowing the principles is not as good as mastering the principles. Mastering mathematical skills requires techniques. So, if one ventures to master these techniques it would cut him time to solve mathematical problems.
However problem solving in mathematics is not all about arithmetic, it requires analysis like what you said, which is a higher order thinking skill than memorizing. But keep this mind, everyone has different level of understanding and learning. You and your classmates were taught of the same subject by the same teacher. But some learned faster, some slower and some not all. Some may be good in memorization, some in analysis, some in both , some in neither. Who should be blamed for non-performance or be praised for achievements; the students for their study habits? the teachers for their pedagogy?or the parents for their genes?
I bet some of your classmates excelled in part 1 of that exam and some on part 2 like you did, some have excelled in both, and some in neither. You must have heard, they hated part 2 because it was more difficult and they also thought they were cheated. But you weren't. You weren't tested with what you have learned you were tested with what thinking skill you are good at.
According to the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy of thinking skills, memorization or remembering is at the bottom of the list. Remembering is actually considered as a low order thinking skill. So students who are good in analyzing worded problems practice higher order thinking than those who can just recite the multiplication table.
Revised Bloom's Taxonomy
1. Create
2. Evaluate
3. Analyze
4. Apply
5. Remember
Regarding your History exams, involves remembering names, dates and places. Knowing the names of people who are recorded in history is somewhat paying respect or acknowledging their contributions. Wouldn't you like to be remembered when you did something great in your lifetime? But history is not just all about those data. Yes, it's also about how and why. That's why teachers conceptualize different types of exams. Most history exams come with identification, enumeration, and essay- writing parts. Am I right?
In reality, it's not just in social science that we are taught as if they are the actual truth. In schools, we are taught of what is acceptable during that time.For example, Democritus held that atoms were indivisible and indestructible. Then came, Rutherford, Bohr, and Thomson's discoveries. But those weren't enough just recently the scientific community discovered sub-subparticles of the atom.
Should we say students before our century were cheated by their teachers? Should we say Dalton cheated his students by declaring that atom is indeed indivisible? No!
Whatever type of classroom education we've had, it won't never be enough specially to freethinkers. Whether we studied in Harvard, Cambridge, Stanford or MIT all those things injected to us won't satisfy our intellectual cravings. Nobody can teach us all things that we want to know. We must do it ourselves.
I agree. I remember back in 1998 how my college teacher who uses a 1970's textbook on astronomy i believed argued with me and isisted that Jupiter has only 11 moons. hehehe.
good points but bad examples
re: math – it's as much a question of speed as it is understanding the formulas. take a marathon for example, everyone knows how to run but its the fastest runner than gets the glory. it would be unfair to your other classmates who practiced more to get the same grade as those who just barely understood the concept.
re: history – as much as we'd like to inject a little lateral thinking into the classroom, its also a bitch to check and grade papers that are all essay-type questions where the students have more room to reason out and show their creative thinking. But there's also too much room for subjectivity when there's no one specific correct answer. constant accusations of unfair grading, favoritism… will make any teacher just stick to objective-type questions.
look, learning is a 2-way street. my advice: if you have any complaints on the teaching style, help the teacher help you. suggest to your prof better ways to conduct the class instead of just bitching about it (and you even get to practice your negotiation and diplomatic skills too, an important thing to have in the real world)
I think it's more a problem of too many students for too few teachers.
As it is, our education system puts a lot of emphasis on spoonfeeding, and very little on creative thinking. Rote memorization is pretty much a guarantee that the student will forget almost all the stuff he "learned" after the exam.
Take it from me. My Chinese classes were all rote memorization, and I can't speak Mandarin worth a lick because of that.
Wow! Never have I realized that we were cheated once already. Maybe allowing "cheating" in the classrooms should be tolerated at least (which by the way, enhance resource-gathering skills), at some level?
Thanks for the article. Never again we'll be cheated!
Someone forced you to believe that 8×8=64? The horror!