|
Walter & Group...
[GH] We have seen answers to Michael Jones' questions from both Gary Eaton and Don Pendleton.
Now we have John Hand coming in with a different point of view :
[GH] Counterpoint, from John Hand :
1. Are any 2 MCI oral exams ever the same?
NO, all examiners are not from the same area. Therefore, each one has a different depth of knowledge from that fishery.
Also, we all have different strengths and weaknesses.
2. Does that favor the candidate?
Yes, most examiners that I have tested with try to concentrate the majority of the oral exam on areas that the candidate should be familiar with.
3. Does that favor the examiner?
No, the examiner is mainly covering the areas which he is the strongest in if the student's knowledge base is from the same type of fishery.
I have not heard any "gotcha" questions on tests I have been a part of only probing questions.
4. Would you (personally) favor a comprehensive written exam for the MCI test over an oral exam (followed by the practical casting component as it stands)?
No, as examiners, we all constantly learn from each other through this verbal exchange. We don't expect an unreasonable amount of knowledge from a candidate. The candidate and the tester's learn from each other during the process.
How can one test the candidates depth of knowledge without the ability to dig deeper?
I believe a candidate learns more about his/her depth of knowledge, or lack of it, through oral testing.
5. How would that change the exam for you (personally)?
A written exam would promote the study of "canned answers" without the fundamentals of verbal exchange using the thought process.
Teaching students will require verbal exchange.
Get on the Water---
Bend a Rod !!!
Capt. John Hand
MCCI
VPSSCC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Here are Michael Jones' answers to his own questions :
My answers:
1. Are any 2 MCI oral exams ever the same? Never, the examiners have varying viewpoints that influence the test.
2. Does that favor the candidate? No, simply put, the candidate is at the mercy of the examiners, not the exam.
3. Does that favor the examiner? Yes, absolutely. An examiner can adjust the follow-up questions to suit the outcome they prefer: pass or fail.
4. Would you (personally) favor a comprehensive written exam for the MCI test over an oral exam (followed by the practical casting component as it stands)? Yes, this would remove the subjective nature of the exam from an examiner vs. candidate, and make it a candidate vs. exam.
5. How would that change the exam for you (personally)? I would be more comfortable failing a written exam, and more likely to want to re-take it again after I failed it the first time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Robert Stouffer weighs in :
Five simple short answer questions for the group: Your answers are based on your impressions as a MCI exam candidate.
1. Are any 2 MCI oral exams ever the same? No
2. Does that favor the candidate? Yes and No
3. Does that favor the examiner? Yes. The examiner learns what works and what does not work by administering several oral exams.
4. Would you (personally) favor a comprehensive written exam for the MCI test over an oral exam (followed by the practical casting component as it stands)? No. We prepare for "an" exam and cannot prepare for "the" exam unless we were issued "the" exam as a study guide. The problem for the candidate, as I see it, is that each individual examiner has their own interests or biases. We are told that the prepared examinee will have developed their own philosophy of teaching and casting. I am certain that each examiner allows for the interests and biases of the candidate. Even the number of fundamentals used by MCI BoG vary from three to five concepts. My first MCI exam was orals and casting combined.
5. How would that change the exam for you (personally)? Personally, I would rather eat barbed wire than take a written exam.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Questions from Don Pendleton :
Gordy,
Frankly the orals portion of the test really scares me. Should it?
Do more candidates fail orals more than performance?
Is there any documentation on pass fail of performance part of the test vs. the oral part of the test?
Don Pendleton
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Don,
I can understand that some candidates would be intimidated by the idea of an oral exam. They might well look at it as a sort of "inquisition". I also know some folks who are unduly frightened at the prospect of taking a written exam. Robert Stouffer penned a distinct distaste for that method.
John Hand presents a counterpoint to written exams in his message, above. I had the pleasure of testing John. He was very experienced and well prepared.
My own testing experience actually allows me try to bring out the best a candidate has to offer as I serve as lead examiner. Here is how I do that :
- I take the time to know the candidate, first, to the extent that I get a sense for how nervous he might be. That, I feel, is of great importance, because I never want my candidate to have as the primary reason for failure, fear and nervousness. I have many ways of defusing that element, many of which I learned from the late Tom White who was best at that. I know of no way of doing that on a written exam.
- I join other lead examiners on starting with the premise that I deeply want my candidate to pass. I feel the hurt and disappointment when that isn't possible.... yet I must keep the standards high.
- Those of you whom I've tested, may recall that I started with questions pertaining to the kind of fishing, casting, and teaching that I discovered you actually did. I did that because I figured you would be comfortable answering those questions, since your answers could come from your own experiences. That makes it a real World experience.
- While I am primarily a salt water fly fisher, in my 70+ years of fly fishing, I've gained experience with all sorts of fresh water fly fishing...... so I'm OK with starting with and concentrating on questions which have to do with whatever fly fishing the candidate does most often. For example, I would never go into great depth of detail on salt water fly gear or fishing for a candidate who primarily fishes high mountain streams for trout. Those of you who are salty fly fishers will remember that I did hold you responsible for in depth knowledge of that kind of fishing and I tread more lightly on the trout fishing questions.
I do see the advantages and disadvantages of each type of testing. The objectivity of the written exam is obvious. As Gary and Michael have pointed out, the subjectivity of the oral exam is equally obvious.
At the same time, I can envisage a candidate who is very bright and well read passing a written exam with flying colors ..... yet unable to verbally present fly casting concepts to his students and peers.
My own preference for testing at this high level, however, is to use the oral method because of its flexibility which can be used to the candidate's fair advantage. As John pointed out, this method of testing helps give the examiner a feel for the candidate's verbal abilities which are so necessary for a Master instructor. It gives the candidate the chance to explain his answers. The written exam can't do that. Of course, the reverse could be true.... though I'd be utterly dismayed to learn that one of our lead examiners would actually take the position of wanting the candidate to flunk.
As a surgeon and a teacher of surgery, I had to take innumerable exams over the years. I vividly recall one in which all of the questions were multiple choice. Each question listed a choice of 5 responses all of which were technically correct ! The student had to choose the best of 5 correct answers in order to score.
As these exams reached higher levels, the exams were given orally. This was done for the same reasons I gave.
To answer your last two questions, Don .... I can recall only two candidates I tested who passed the oral and then flunked the casting. One candidate didn't pass the oral and declined to continue to the casting part. I don't know the general statistics.
That might be a difficult statistic to dig out, since a number of lead examiners now give the oral part as the casting is done. Many candidates have preferred that method.
Gordy
|