Do your teachers allow for any use of open book/notes for tests?

[land_of_ice]

What level of math are you in,
also, is it at a 2 year college or a university?
How about other math classes (after trigonometry) ?

 

[George Jones]

I have given open-notes quantum mechanics exams to graduate students: four hours, do any four of five questions. The students hated this format.

 

[Klockan3]

I have had tests like this, there isn't much of a difference except that you have to study differently and the examinator need to put more effort into the questions.

 

[deadkitty]

I'm currently in calc III at a 2 year college, I've had many no calculator tests and also take home open book, classmate, and the teacher gives hints. I would take the no calculator tests any day over open book. Open book tend to be really open and sometimes its hard to nail down exactly what the teacher wants, especially when trying to figure out a new concept. Many times this involves proving all the aspects around the proof. Solving straight direct problems is much easier.

 

[Newtime]

I've had close book and notes, open book no notes, no book open notes, etc. Also, you'll see take home exams every now and again. But this all depends on your professor. However, the VAST majority of my exams so far have been typical closed-everything exams in class for about an hour.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I'm considering changing the format of my exams to open-note or even take-home (Intro Physics I, II). I'm curious to hear what the students think- do you have a preference, and why?

 

[Newtime]

Personally, I like the idea of a take-home exam which is more difficult than the average homework set and in which you're only required to solve n-1 out of n problems, or something like that. It's more challenging and much, much more rewarding and far less stressful than an in-class exam for which you're worried about memorizing all the "right" stuff.

From talking to my professors about this same thing, I get the impression it's actually more difficult to write a take home exam or an exam for which students are allowed to use notes. I suppose it's because the questions have to be different altogether; not just harder, but conceptually harder, because all the formulas and basic facts are at your fingertips. Again, I prefer this because it forces you to learn all the material rather than memorize the test-able material.

 

[George Jones]

Personally, I like the idea of a take-home exam which is more difficult than the average homework set and in which you're only required to solve n-1 out of n problems, or something like that.

In theory, I like this idea. Unfortunately, I have seen enough examples (at a number of universities where I have taught)) of students cheating (they get somebody else to solve problems for them) on take-home exams that I will not give take-homes.

 

[rasmhop]

I just finished my first year of math at university. I've only had math courses (calc, linear algebra, abstract algebra, analysis I+II, probability&statistics, differential geometry, discrete math) and all my written exams have been open-book 3.5-4.5 hours (this semester I will also have some take-home 36h exams, and I have had a few oral exams).

I prefer the open-book format as closed-book tests often result in people preparing by memorizing a number of facts, while open-book tests result in people preparing by trying to understand the material, common techniques and how the results are derived. Open-book also often results in more creatively challenging questions as the test-creators know not to test if you know your basic facts, but rather whether you understand them thoroughly and can apply them.

At most of my exams I haven't needed to open my book, but it's nice to know I have the possibility in case I forget whether a theorem requires a function to be n-times differentiable or n-times continuously differentiable, and whether we need differentiability at the end-points of a closed interval. In case of a closed-book exam I would have spend a significant time making sure I really could remember the technical details.

 

[Newtime]

In theory, I like this idea. Unfortunately, I have seen enough examples (at a number of universities where I have taught)) of students cheating (they get somebody else to solve problems for them) on take-home exams that I will not give take-homes.

I could see this happening quite often. You would think that the only people who are in upper level math/physics courses are there because they want to be and are willing to work but I guess there will always be those looking for a shortcut.

 

[Andy Resnick]

In theory, I like this idea. Unfortunately, I have seen enough examples (at a number of universities where I have taught)) of students cheating (they get somebody else to solve problems for them) on take-home exams that I will not give take-homes.

Cheating is one of my concerns, as well.

Even so, I believe that establishing an effective learning environment requires an element of trust; for example, the students must trust me not to ridicule their 'stupid' questions in class. And to some degree, I should trust them to be honest. So far, it's worked.

But as Newtime mentioned, take-home exams are much more difficult to write, for the exact reason mentioned- I have to account for the immense amount of material they have access to. In-class open-book (or allowing a 'cheat-sheet') tests are easier to write.

Maybe I'll let the class vote, and unless there is a clear majority (take-home vs. in-class), I'll default to in-class open-note. The faculty I've talked to tell me that students rarely open the book- the book is more like a security blanket and relieves some test anxiety.

 

[xcvxcvvc]

Most of my classes have 1 to 2 hour exams where I'm allowed to bring in one 8.5 x 11 piece of paper with anything I want written on it, front and back. I like this format. They're also normally small enough to finish in half the time allotted if you're very quick with solving each problem. This size reduces stress, allows good students to check and recheck their work, and allows bad students to sit and think for a while.

 

[Klockan3]

So far, it's worked.

What exactly do that mean?

 

[Andy Resnick]

What exactly do that mean?

I haven't had a problem with student cheating, even when they have an opportunity to do so.

 

[nicksauce]

I'm considering changing the format of my exams to open-note or even take-home (Intro Physics I, II). I'm curious to hear what the students think- do you have a preference, and why?

(IMO)They will cheat. I think take-home exams are only suitable for grad students or upper year undergrads.

 

[xcvxcvvc]

(IMO)They will cheat. I think take-home exams are only suitable for grad students or upper year undergrads.

Perhaps. One way to reduce cheating among each other is to introduce a true curve grading scale. Therefore, if you help another student by doing his homework or his take home test, you hurt yourself. You can never prevent them, however, from posting on physics help forums or from having a family member or friend not in the class to help them.

 

[Ryker]

Perhaps. One way to reduce cheating among each other is to introduce a true curve grading scale. Therefore, if you help another student by doing his homework or his take home test, you hurt yourself. You can never prevent them, however, from posting on physics help forums or from having a family member or friend not in the class to help them.

That could also lead to punishment of those who choose not to cheat, so I don't think a true curve grading scale is such a good idea.

 

[Klockan3]

I haven't had a problem with student cheating, even when they have an opportunity to do so.

How do you know?

 

[Newtime]

The faculty I've talked to tell me that students rarely open the book- the book is more like a security blanket and relieves some test anxiety.

I can attest to this being absolutely true, at least within my circle of friends/classmates.

(IMO)They will cheat. I think take-home exams are only suitable for grad students or upper year undergrads.

I very much agree.

 

[Andy Resnick]

How do you know?

That's a fair question- I guess, strictly speaking, I don't know (since I am unable to watch 100% of the students 100% of the time). All I can say is I've yet to see any evidence that cheating has occurred.

 

[Andy Resnick]

(IMO)They will cheat. I think take-home exams are only suitable for grad students or upper year undergrads.

Why? Do you think one student population have a greater desire to cheat over another?

 

[Andy Resnick]

Perhaps. One way to reduce cheating among each other is to introduce a true curve grading scale.

I'm opposed to 'grading on a curve'. I feel it adds an element of competition that distracts from focussing on learning the material.

 

[Newtime]

Why? Do you think one student population have a greater desire to cheat over another?

I don't know what nicksauce has to say, but since I agreed with him I'll give my two cents: yes I do. In my classes, many of those in lower level math and physics courses are there because they have to be and don't care at all about learning the material; they just want the grade.

 

[Ryker]

I'm opposed to 'grading on a curve'. I feel it adds an element of competition that distracts from focussing on learning the material.

Exactly, and not only that, if you think about it it's unfair and doesn't paint a real picture of students' knowledge even if you do see tests as being able to show this true knowledge. You could have a hundred extremely apt students who would all be the best minds in the country, some scoring 100%, some 99% etc., but those that'd score, say, "only" 95% would get a D just because there're people that did a bit better. You could also get the opposite result where all students were subpar, but you'd give out A's regardless, since some would be less subpar. Therefore I'm completely opposed to curve grading, as well, because it leads to grades contingent on relative and not absolute knowledge.

 

[xcvxcvvc]

Exactly, and not only that, if you think about it it's unfair and doesn't paint a real picture of students' knowledge even if you do see tests as being able to show this true knowledge. You could have a hundred extremely apt students who would all be the best minds in the country, some scoring 100%, some 99% etc., but those that'd score, say, "only" 95% would get a D just because there're people that did a bit better. You could also get the opposite result where all students were subpar, but you'd give out A's regardless, since some would be less subpar. Therefore I'm completely opposed to curve grading, as well, because it leads to grades contingent on relative and not absolute knowledge.

Ok, but there is still a human on the other end of the algorithm (the professor) who should have enough sense in that scenario to reward all students with an A. Further, you're applying the theory to a single class, too small of a sample to count. Instead, any reasonable professor applying a curve does so with all past students he's ever had, and while on the journey to acquiring such a history as to make his algorithm less quirky, he has the sense of a human being to iron out to rough spots.

 

[George Jones]

(IMO)They will cheat. I think take-home exams are only suitable for grad students or upper year undergrads.

At one university where I taught, a couple of grad students were caught cheating on a take-home exam (not for my class).

I have given open-notes quantum mechanics exams to graduate students: four hours, do any four of five questions.

I caught a grad student cheating on this type of exam. A student, whose first language was xxxx, came to the exam with a text that had an unmarked cover and asked "Can I use this xxx-to-English dictionary during the exam?" I replied, "Sure."

Even so, I believe that establishing an effective learning environment requires an element of trust; for example, the students must trust me not to ridicule their 'stupid' questions in class. And to some degree, I should trust them to be honest.

This was a small grad class, and I thought that I had established good relationships with all the students, so I trusted him, and I didn't check the book until after the exam started, when his use of it made me suspicious. The book was an advanced quantum mechanics text written in xxxx. I was deeply hurt that this student had abused the trust that I had placed in him, and had made an outright lie to me (face-to-face) in order to try and cheat.

Also, we (the Mentors) have caught students trying to use Physics Forums to cheat on upper level/grad take-homes.

So, occasionally, grad student cheat too.

 

[Andy Resnick]

This discussion is interesting- on one hand, most students (at least the ones posting) like open-note tests because it's a better measure of their comprehension. On the other, some people claim this encourages cheating (presumably by *others* :) .

Edit: George posted while I was composing... George, your experiences must have been frustrating. But, how can we discourage cheating while not penalizing the honest students? I don't think you would prefer to turn the classroom into a maximum-security observation prison...

What if test questions could be designed to make cheating *more effort* that knowing the material in the first place?

 

[xcvxcvvc]

This discussion is interesting- on one hand, most students (at least the ones posting) like open-note tests because it's a better measure of their comprehension. On the other, some people claim this encourages cheating (presumably by *others* :) .

Edit: George posted while I was composing... George, your experiences must have been frustrating. But, how can we discourage cheating while not penalizing the honest students? I don't think you would prefer to turn the classroom into a maximum-security observation prison...

What if test questions could be designed to make cheating *more effort* that knowing the material in the first place?

How can you do that? How can you make it harder to cheat than to know the material if cheating means you have someone who knows the material doing your exam?

 

[rasmhop]

It's a bit disheartening to hear that people (even grad students who presumably want to do research in the area) cheat on take home exams.

Take-home exams are pretty common at my university and I have never heard of anyone cheating. I suspect and hope only a very small minority of the students try cheating, and it will affect them negatively later on so I don't really feel cheated personally.

But, how can we discourage cheating while not penalizing the honest students? I don't think you would prefer to turn the classroom into a maximum-security observation prison...

I know this is not directed at me, but I want to share my thoughts anyway.

At my school it's common for a class to have either an in-class test or weekly assignments which are awarded a pass/fail mark. Any student with a hope of passing should be able to earn pass on these (in the case of weekly assignments often it's only required that 80% of assignments are awarded pass). If a student fails this they will not be eligible to participate in the final exam and will be given a fail grade for the course. If they pass they will get to participate in the exam and get a real grade, but the pass/fail stuff has no influence on the grade. This both forces students to keep up with coursework and not just cram at the end, and it makes it much harder to cheat without acquiring at least some mastery of the subject (you have to be a dedicated cheater to have someone else help you cheat on a weekly basis). This is by no means foolproof and I suspect the reasoning behind it is to keep students engaged in the subject rather than to avoid cheating.

Personally I would try to trust students even if some don't deserve it. If you want to give a take-home exam give it. If someone wants to cheat he will cheat, but he will only really cheat himself (assuming you don't judge on a curve). If the class is small enough that you know your students personally and someone turned in something you consider suspicious (for instance if someone who barely understands the basic concepts submits a perfect answer to a hard assignment), then you can invite that person to a talk about the exam. Not in an accusatory manner, but just talk about the problems his approaches and thoughts. It should be apparent whether he cheated. If he did you can take the appropriate actions. If not you can congratulate him on his good performance.

If you really feel that cheating is a problem, then I would just do a normal test (open- or closed book) that is supervised. It really isn't that much worse, but personally I feel that instructors should be able to trust their students (and vice versa) in a university-setting.

 

[nicksauce]

I don't know what nicksauce has to say, but since I agreed with him I'll give my two cents: yes I do. In my classes, many of those in lower level math and physics courses are there because they have to be and don't care at all about learning the material; they just want the grade.

Exactly this.

 

[Klockan3]

That's a fair question- I guess, strictly speaking, I don't know (since I am unable to watch 100% of the students 100% of the time). All I can say is I've yet to see any evidence that cheating has occurred.

It is really hard to see that people cheat. I have corrected assignments as a TA and I have found one really glaring mistake which made it obvious that he cheated, he made an error in the beginning which gave the wrong relationship between two variables but later he used the correct relationship like everybody else. Basically he didn't understand anything and just copied someones elses solution for his values.

In my opinion when person A explains step by step how to solve the problem to person B then B is cheating, of course he needs to have a rudimentary understanding of the basics to be able to do this. This type of cheat is all but impossible to find though and is really common. Basically the freeloader in a study group. I have also seen how my classmates solved their assignments, a few actually did solve it and the rest either got the solution explained by those or they tried to solve it in all ways possible till their solution looks like everyone elses. And yes they all compare solutions to make sure they are right...

I don't really have much respect at all for home assignments for these reasons, but for upper level courses there isn't much else you can do that gives a fair examination and it gets exceedingly harder to cheat in this way the harder the courses gets so it is ok.

 

[clope023]

(IMO)They will cheat. I think take-home exams are only suitable for grad students or upper year undergrads.

I agree, its amazing how many people will become friends with the smart kid when they have to do mastering physics homework just for one example; and they do cheat in tests too, I've had a few teachers who don't allow formula sheets or whatnot on tests and trust me students will find a way to bring their own and pass it to their classmates (I've heard of very elaborate cheating methods)

 

[Andy Resnick]

How can you do that? How can you make it harder to cheat than to know the material if cheating means you have someone who knows the material doing your exam?

I'm not claiming to have solved the problem.

But, my exams have open-ended questions: I've even used questions posted at PF (suitably modified) as questions. My reasoning is that (1) a student who gets an advanced student to answer the question for them will be obvious- just as you can tell on PF who has more advanced knowledge, and (2) by making the questions slightly ambiguous, forcing the student to lay out a line of thought, I can tell if the student's reasoning deviates from their questions and discussions in class.

 

[Klockan3]

Cheating will always be there. The question is if the added bonus of having this kind of test for the motivated students weights up the amount of people who barely learned anything at all and still passed the course due to cheating.

I think that in the end the motivated students will fare well no matter the examination method, if you don't have a take home exam they will still do comparable problems of their own in order to train for the exam. If you have a normal guarded exam then at least most won't cheat which is why this method is the most used.

 

[Andy Resnick]

At my school it's common for a class to have either an in-class test or weekly assignments which are awarded a pass/fail mark. Any student with a hope of passing should be able to earn pass on these (in the case of weekly assignments often it's only required that 80% of assignments are awarded pass). If a student fails this they will not be eligible to participate in the final exam and will be given a fail grade for the course. If they pass they will get to participate in the exam and get a real grade, but the pass/fail stuff has no influence on the grade. This both forces students to keep up with coursework and not just cram at the end, and it makes it much harder to cheat without acquiring at least some mastery of the subject (you have to be a dedicated cheater to have someone else help you cheat on a weekly basis). This is by no means foolproof and I suspect the reasoning behind it is to keep students engaged in the subject rather than to avoid cheating.

This is an interesting idea- I need to think about incorporating this. I do have 'reading quizzes' (based on the Just-In-Time instructional method), and this sounds similar. I don't have a punitive component...

But yes, having a large variety of ways to assess the student is a good idea in general.

 

[ledicarus]

If you create a test using everything you instructed in class, and allow the students to use their own personal notes taken in class to assist them in completing the test- there won't be cheating. The test results then weigh heavily on the students ability to take proper notes in class and not on the information found in the textbook.

Also a sidebar question. Tonight my girlfriend is grading 120 papers. Is she grading them, or degrading them? The thought occurred to me, the tests have already been completed and are, until proven otherwise, 100% correct. Therefore a teacher actually degrades the tests of their students. If the questions were being 'graded' at the same time the answers were being written this could be seen as 'grading' (a progression of mark). Just a curiosity I had.

 

[l'Hôpital]

The thought occurred to me, the tests have already been completed and are, until proven otherwise, 100% correct. Therefore a teacher actually degrades the tests of their students.

Disagreed.

I've always felt that tests are and have always been 0% until proven otherwise. After all, the questions are unanswered until you read them. Therefore, depending on the answer, the student will earn points for his work, which makes sense. It's not like they are going to give you a prize for running a race then take it back and if you don't win it. They only give the prize if you do, in fact, win. I think this is the mentality most often use since it makes sense with the use of grading schemes. You check to see if the student has the things that merit him points. Granted, with more open-ended questions, it seems a bit more difficult to adequately grade things in such a manner, but still. I (as a student) like to think that I am earning points for my work rather than losing points for my mistakes. Seems like much more positive. : )

 

[ledicarus]

Disagreed.

I've always felt that tests are and have always been 0% until proven otherwise. After all, the questions are unanswered until you read them. Therefore, depending on the answer, the student will earn points for his work, which makes sense. It's not like they are going to give you a prize for running a race then take it back and if you don't win it. They only give the prize if you do, in fact, win. I think this is the mentality most often use since it makes sense with the use of grading schemes. You check to see if the student has the things that merit him points. Granted, with more open-ended questions, it seems a bit more difficult to adequately grade things in such a manner, but still. I (as a student) like to think that I am earning points for my work rather than losing points for my mistakes. Seems like much more positive. : )

True, but in your example of the race the outcome is determined by the racers passing markers, or points along the track. In the example of a graded test this would be taking the paper after each question is completed and marking it right or wrong. By the fourth of ten questions you may already have determined whether or not the student with fail- the grading of tests. In the example of a race we've grown smarter to await the results of a computer to determine the winner (the exception being the US election about a decade ago). If two runners are neck and neck a photo finish provides the winner. Let's apply this to a baseball game. A runner comes into home and is called 'out'. The game is now technically over, however that call can be contested and only after reviewing evidence is the call proven accurate or in this example inaccurate. Therefore a prize can be taken back after being given. A de-grading.

 

[Moonbear]

Also a sidebar question. Tonight my girlfriend is grading 120 papers. Is she grading them, or degrading them? The thought occurred to me, the tests have already been completed and are, until proven otherwise, 100% correct. Therefore a teacher actually degrades the tests of their students. If the questions were being 'graded' at the same time the answers were being written this could be seen as 'grading' (a progression of mark). Just a curiosity I had.

I give positive points. Each component of the assignment has a point value for a correct response. Incorrect responses receive no points, correct responses are +1. A well-prepared teacher can account for all of their grading decisions in advance, and even explain it sufficiently to the students that they know exactly what is expected of them. For example, you may wonder about those who write down every random, disjointed thought that comes to mind when writing an essay answer, hoping the grader will simply scan for correct statements and disregard all the guessing going along with it. Instead, for such a question, I award a positive point for keeping the answer concise and relevant.

I was a TA in a course where the deduction grading scheme was used (-1 for every mistake and -0 for correct responses). The problem with that grading scheme is it's actually possible to get a negative score on an assignment. I stopped at 0, because it really didn't matter beyond that, but negative scores are a big sign that something is very wrong with the grading strategy.

Back when I was a student, slightly after dinosaurs roamed the Earth, I did have some courses that were open book exams. I enjoyed them, because I was never a really good memorizer, but was very good at problem-solving and applying concepts. That was the best use of an open-book exam, to write them so students need to use tables or formulae in the book to solve more advanced problems. The problems were also written to be just long enough answers that if you didn't already have a good familiarity with the subject and content of the tested chapters, you would not have enough time to complete the exam simply by trying to hunt and read the chapters during the exam.

I didn't have any take-home exams until grad school, and those were all customized for the individual students, so if you were spending time offering help to a fellow student, you were cutting into your own time to work on your own exam, which was a different topic.

At any lower level of course, or any situation where everyone is given the same assignment, I will never give an assignment to be done at home unless I expect there to be collaboration among students. For example, I do give homework assignments. My goal with homework assignments is not to test students' knowledge. That's what the exams are for. My goal with homework assignments is to get them to prepare for class ahead of lecture. I don't care if they get the answers by reading the book, looking them up online, or asking their friends. What I care is that they take a few minutes to look up some easy answers so they are somewhat oriented to the topic that will be covered in lecture to get the most out of the lecture (homework is also weighted as a very low percentage of the overall course grade). It's not so much a student assessment as a motivator.

 

[General_Sax]

I've only ever had closed-book no calculator exams for maths, and closed-book exams for every other subject -- barring the formula sheets provided.

IMO, these are the most fair examinations, because they ensure that each student has access to an equal amount of resources.

Aside: Take-home exams will invite cheating, because each student has incentive to achieve the highest grade possible. I'm against giving -- mind you I'm not an instructor -- take-home exams, unless the course material is too complex -- I've never been in this situation, but my HS maths teacher told me that he's had take-home examinations for this reason.

 

[Andy Resnick]

The thought occurred to me, the tests have already been completed and are, until proven otherwise, 100% correct. Therefore a teacher actually degrades the tests of their students. If the questions were being 'graded' at the same time the answers were being written this could be seen as 'grading' (a progression of mark). Just a curiosity I had.

I'm with Moonbear- I award points, as opposed to removing them.

 

[eXorikos]

I in general find open-book exams harder than closed-book. The emphasis is mostly placed on the interpretation of your results rather than how you get to that result. Although that statement is only based on my previous 3 years.

Though I prefer open-book, because it's more interesting. I feel I'm learning a lot more than by just studying the matter so I know it by heart.

 

[clope023]

my electronics teacher is this semester

 

[Cod]

All the math exams at my university are closed note / closed book; however, you are allowed a calculator for the entire exam. On my Calc II final, the professor provided us with three pages of theorems which were covered over the semester. I like this method because it provided a little insight, without "telling" you how to do it, if you got stuck on a problem.

As far as the cheating thing is concerned, I believe every class will have at least one on any given exam. We got a quiz back a few weeks ago and I searched the exact question online, to find all of the quiz questions asked on Cramster, all posted the day the exam was given. It's pathetic what people will do for a letter grade.

 

[Jokerhelper]

Well I feel left out of the party! Since grade 1 up to undergrad, I've had ONE open-book exam. And to add insult to injury, it was a social studies test on the formation of Italy and Germany... and I grew up in Italy and studied history for 6 years!

Cheating is one of my concerns, as well.
Maybe I'll let the class vote, and unless there is a clear majority (take-home vs. in-class), I'll default to in-class open-note. The faculty I've talked to tell me that students rarely open the book- the book is more like a security blanket and relieves some test anxiety.

Trust me, don't do a take home exam for first year students. Like some already said, us students, freshmen in particular, generally only care about getting the grade. You are giving way too much credit to your students by trusting them and considering to let them vote. Since most probably never had a take-home exam in high school, their general reasoning will just be "take-home exam? --> = exam with no surveillance --> get answers from smart guy --> good grade!" and will vote yes. The moment they will leave your class, they will start working together and will cheat. Groupthink will eventually set in and most won't even see it as cheating. I know it sounds harsh, but most of us a really still irresponsible people that only think short term.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Trust me, don't do a take home exam for first year students. Like some already said, us students, freshmen in particular, generally only care about getting the grade. You are giving way too much credit to your students by trusting them and considering to let them vote. Since most probably never had a take-home exam in high school, their general reasoning will just be "take-home exam? --> = exam with no surveillance --> get answers from smart guy --> good grade!" and will vote yes. The moment they will leave your class, they will start working together and will cheat. Groupthink will eventually set in and most won't even see it as cheating. I know it sounds harsh, but most of us a really still irresponsible people that only think short term.

I decided against take-home exams, but I am making them open book.

 

[jf22901]

I decided against take-home exams, but I am making them open book.

Most of the physics exams I sat for my BSc involved a question paper and a formula sheet. The sheet was just a big long list of formulae, with no mention of what they were for, or whether they would be of any use for the paper.

I preferred this type of exam, as meant I could revise the actual physics, rather than just memorising the formulae (which was good, as my memory is awful! ). You still had to be able to recognise which formulae to use, and know how to combine and rearrange them, but the sheet acted as a kind of safety blanket.

For the other exams, which provided a question paper and nothing else, I spent all my time memorising the formulae, and as such I feel I missed out on a lot of the actual physics content of the courses.

 

[sEsposito]

I'm an upper undergrad right now and by now I've had my fair share of exams...

By far the best (in my opinion) method to give a test is closed book, closed notes... Except for one sheet of paper. On this sheet the Professor allows you to write whatever you wish. be it formulas, examples of problems from the book/lectures or scribbles -- he didn't care.

Now there is a true science to forming this sheet of paper. I was exposed to this testing method in Calc I and in Calc III. In the Calc I class a lot of students wrote very small (almost unreadable) and tried to cram as much crap as they possibly could on there. The first time around I wrote only the trigonometric identities on the sheet. I finished the exam and when I was walking out I noticed most of the class was not going to finish in time; they spent all their time either trying to discern their chicken scratch or figuring out what to use where.

I had some rough spots once or twice with the sheet of paper, but once I found a balance between too much info and not enough it was a great way to take a test.

As far as take homes go, well I've had these too. Firstly, you have to ask yourself what is cheating on a take home? Is it using the internet, using a textbook, using the help of another person? Where's the line and when does it get crossed?

Relatedly, in Calc II my teacher gave a mid-term and final (closed book and no notes), but instead of quizzes and test every week he gave us graded HW on a website called WebAssign. Well, he was kind enough to remind everyone every single day to log into web assign and to do the 10 problems before the time limit was reached on Sunday nights. But, no one really did. He said frequently in the second half of the class that only 4 or 5 students had actually done a good portion of the assignments. I was happy at the end of the course when I got an A because the WebAssign HWs were worth 30% in the end, everyone else didn't fare so well. But, WebAssign was good for other reasons too. It provided feedback right away; if you entered a wrong answer, it told you so and gave you 4 more chances to get it right. The only downside was learning how to enter the correct mathematical expression but I picked it up fairly quickly.

 

[Chunkysalsa]

I like when professors give out formula sheets. Ones with just pure formulas with no explanation on notation, variable meaning, or conditions of use. Makes it so you have to know the formula but not have to memorize it.

I never use notes on tests though. Whenever a professor let's us have a few sheets of paper or an index card, I generally only write down formulas I haven't quite memorized. ( I never memorize formulas, but these things generally get stuck in your brain after a few problems)

I've seen my classmates write down ever bit of information and try to find it during thie test. They most likely knew the material but decided to use the paper rather then searching their heads. Wasted time and effort IMO.

I've always hated open book tests though. They are always 10x harder, longer, and more stressful. I've generally tried to keep the book closed for as long as possible. You waste so much time searching for one thing that may or may not help you. You can't exactly teach yourself the problem during a test.

 

[diazona]

Relatedly, in Calc II my teacher gave a mid-term and final (closed book and no notes), but instead of quizzes and test every week he gave us graded HW on a website called WebAssign. Well, he was kind enough to remind everyone every single day to log into web assign and to do the 10 problems before the time limit was reached on Sunday nights. But, no one really did. He said frequently in the second half of the class that only 4 or 5 students had actually done a good portion of the assignments. I was happy at the end of the course when I got an A because the WebAssign HWs were worth 30% in the end, everyone else didn't fare so well. But, WebAssign was good for other reasons too. It provided feedback right away; if you entered a wrong answer, it told you so and gave you 4 more chances to get it right. The only downside was learning how to enter the correct mathematical expression but I picked it up fairly quickly.

You may be the first person I've ever heard of who didn't hate WebAssign with a passion

I've had my share of tests in the one-page-of-notes style. I don't mind it, but the one-page restriction seems pretty arbitrary. You're definitely right that using (and, when necessary, preparing) resources to use for an open-book or open-note test is a skill that many people struggle with. Personally I think I'm pretty good at it so I happen to like open-note tests, but I guess the preference depends on each student's particular strengths. If you're good at straight memorization or derivations, you'd probably prefer closed-book tests.