theres no denying that multi choice is convenient but at lower levels of education i think it is a suitable measurement of knowledge. i also agree on the understanding bit as multi choice gives no opportunity to explain but good questioning from an on line bank of questions should go some way to covering this.
you say you would want to witness me but that may only test skills, many skillful DIY people out there who can bend and fit pipe very well. But i have seen myself how these people come unstuck when having to think for theirselves.
new qualifications have units which are either knowledge (multi choice), skills (practical) or combined (both). Most units in the new schemes are combined, ie you will not gain the unit unles you satisfy criteria in both. For trades i think this is suitable balance of assessment. In psychology or other academic subjects this may not be the case
Fuzzy, what you say makes sense and it is the way it is. I am also sorry for the 'psychology' reference, which was a bit misleading - what I meant was that, if you wish to read more on multiple choice questions, then this subject matter is located in 'psychology' journals, which can be searched on google scholar. When we talk of 'cognitive' skills, this is associated with the mind and psychology - multiple choice questions claim to test cognitive skills, which might be made up of comprehension, analytical, problem solving skills - they are in the mind, hence psychological.
However observing performance does not only test skills, it tests 'skilled behaviour' (competence). I can observe your work process knowledge (what comes first, second, third), I can observe your knowledge of systems, and practical skill and I can infer competence through your demonstration of know-how to produce a product that is fit for purpose, and meets an occupational standard - I can do this without saying a word to you. I can also observe attitudinal aspects of competence such as workmanship, attention to detail, customer relations, peer relations, environmental awareness, abilities to co-ordinate and organise, to check and work safely.
As for the DIY analogy, this is good, and prompts the assertion that assessing for competence requires sustained observations in multiple contexts, and relationships if we are really talking about qualifications testing 'occupational competence'. This is often not the case.
With the new qualifications I would like to know more, if possible. Regarding the combined units, is this a practical assessment with 'verbal' knowledge testing in situation? or do the candidates do the performance practical, and then combine the knowledge unit they have already achieved through classroom activities. The combination units are a mystery to me.
