Can Students Fail Tests?

[jdinca]

I'm going to agree and disagree - students can fail; if they can't, it's not a test - it's a demonstration. However, whether or not a student tests is up to me - if I haven't cleared the student to test, and s/he shows up thing s/he'll test, s/he'll have quite a shock. I have had students fail, usually due to nerves, although I have had the occasional student who thinks s/he's hot stuff blow off testing (walk through techniques, not try, etc.) and fail that way - but it's fairly rare, because I won't let a student test if s/he can't pass - that's poor instruction - but neither is passing at testing guaranteed.

We always do a pretesting to determine who is ready to test - and my assistant instructor and I decide together who is and is not ready to test, and then the students are informed of our decision. If you're not ready, you don't test - and I've never had problems with it; in fact, when I've told students they aren't testing, the usual response is "thank you - I didn't think so either" - including one girl who was 13 at the time, who told me that she knew she wasn't ready, and if I had told her to test, was going to ask if she could wait for the next testing, because she didn't want to get up, do badly, and embarrass herself or the class.

There's actually no disagreement here. I've never had a student go through a test without my approval, but it has happened on occasion. Typically, it's a young student with parents pushing from behind, or a student who's become somewhat "teacher deaf". It is on the rare side, though. I've also turned down a few students who wanted to test. Some students have been tested who didn't think they were ready just because I knew they were and wanted to give them a confidence boost. Trust me, I wouldn't do it if I hadn't mentally already passed them. These are usually tests done in a private lesson, as opposed to going before the belt board. If a student is moving well enough during the belt prep, I'll make it a test and the student doesn't know it until I say "congratulations".

These scenarios, for the most part, are all in the early belts. When a student gets to the point where they're ready to test for, say, advanced purple, or blue belt, things get much more structured. By this point, they should have a decent understanding of how the system works and what's expected.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I've gotta disagree with your first sentence. If a student isn't ready and allowed to test, you have a point. Even in this case, some students will insist they be allowed to test and if they won't listen, then one of the best ways to get the point across is to allow them to test and fail. This has to be very selective though, based on the student. But if an instructor thinks a student is ready, and the student locks up for whatever reason and has a bad test, how can that be the fault of the instructor?

Pre-tests are a great idea. It's pretty standard for us to do a "belt prep" lesson before a student tests. I will agree that the instructor is being graded on the students test, just as much, if not more, than the student is.

I agree with the comments here but also would like to add in that I have seen studnets do well in pre-tests or check outs, and then with the formaility of a test just fall apart.

If the student falls apart or gets lazy is it still the instructors fault, even though the student did well by themselves before the test?

 

[Kacey]

I agree with the comments here but also would like to add in that I have seen studnets do well in pre-tests or check outs, and then with the formaility of a test just fall apart.

If the student falls apart or gets lazy is it still the instructors fault, even though the student did well by themselves before the test?

One of the purposes of testing, IMHO, is to see how the student reacts on under pressure - how does the student perform when nervous? How does the student respond to errors? How does the student respond to a different voice (our testings are done by other instructors, not the students' instructor)? How does the student respond when asked to do something beyond their own level? If the class is testing with another class, how does the student respond to any of the differences between classes? To having a partner other than the person(s) they are used to from class? How well can the student block out anything that may be occurring outside the dojang? All of these questions address the question of reacting under pressure - which in turn speaks to how well the student knows and understands what s/he is doing. If you can't respond under the pressure of testing, how well do you really know what you've been taught?

Some things cannot be determined in the everyday dojang setting - one of those things is how students respond to novel stimuli, such as those described above. One of the purposes of testing is to help determine those questions - and to help students learn how to respond to variant stimuli while under stress - at least, that's the way I see it.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

If the student falls apart or gets lazy is it still the instructors fault, even though the student did well by themselves before the test?

I've had students (children) fall apart during a test. Public things here, with 50-100 spectators in attendance. Each time I did what was necessary to rescue the situation. Second shots, highlighting what they do know, whatever it took to salvage that child's dignity in public.

I figure it's my job, since I was the one who put them up not fully prepared in the first place.

 

[jdinca]

I've had students (children) fall apart during a test. Public things here, with 50-100 spectators in attendance. Each time I did what was necessary to rescue the situation. Second shots, highlighting what they do know, whatever it took to salvage that child's dignity in public.

I figure it's my job, since I was the one who put them up not fully prepared in the first place.

We don't allow spectators (except parents) at belt boards but there is at least a dozen instructors and black belts sitting at the front of the room. Some students thrive in this environment, some crash and burn and most are somewhere in the middle. If you KNOW a student is going to crash and burn under that type of pressure, then yes, it is your responsibility for putting them in that enviromnent in the first place. But if you don't know, then how can you place it on your shoulders? There's been a number of students who come to a belt board and the consensus is not to pass them based on their performance but, since it was due to the level of anxiety from the situation, they get tested in a private lesson within a couple of weeks and usually pass. It's all part of the learning process for the instructor, as well as the student.

 

[kidswarrior]

Been thinkin' about tests and testing of late. I've never failed a student who took a test from me. There's plenty I've pulled aside and told to wait another month. But to my way of thinking, if a student gets up on test day unprepared...

That's the teacher's fault. There's no way the student should have to face the humiliation of doing poorly and not receving rank for their teacher's innatention and slipshod work.

Again, I've told lots of students to wait another month. But I don't fail tests. You could say that the 'test' is really an exhibition and celebration, but the student is tested for rank in each class?

I agree pretty much hook, line and sinker. As a professional teacher, I and my colleagues are certainly held responsible for all kids' test scores, and we have virtually no say in who gets tested when. That's the other end of the spectrum. But for a student whom we MAists invite to rank test, we should have the judgement to know who is and is not ready.

'Exhibition' and 'celebration' are good ways to look at this. I actually prefer 'authentication', because I see it as a time for a student to prove to me, to senior students, and to her/his fellows that s/he's worthy of operating at the next level. It just authenticates what every class session for the past months has taught.

As far as it being a chance to examine them under pressure and to use novel situations, imho we can---and should--be doing that as a matter of course in our classes. So would I ever fail a student? Maybe one here or there, just as I can't save every student in my day job. Some are just determined to self destruct (can anyone say 'fear of success'?). But 98-99 out of 100 should be successful.

 

[Rich Parsons]

One of the purposes of testing, IMHO, is to see how the student reacts on under pressure - how does the student perform when nervous? How does the student respond to errors? How does the student respond to a different voice (our testings are done by other instructors, not the students' instructor)? How does the student respond when asked to do something beyond their own level? If the class is testing with another class, how does the student respond to any of the differences between classes? To having a partner other than the person(s) they are used to from class? How well can the student block out anything that may be occurring outside the dojang? All of these questions address the question of reacting under pressure - which in turn speaks to how well the student knows and understands what s/he is doing. If you can't respond under the pressure of testing, how well do you really know what you've been taught?

Some things cannot be determined in the everyday dojang setting - one of those things is how students respond to novel stimuli, such as those described above. One of the purposes of testing is to help determine those questions - and to help students learn how to respond to variant stimuli while under stress - at least, that's the way I see it.

We also rotate their facing to one not normally used during practice. You cannot believe how much of a difference for forms and other technique demonstrations when you change their prospective or perception of start and stop or what they see.

I work them in all facings and around but sometimes beginners are only used to practicing or mostly practicing facing in one direction only.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I've had students (children) fall apart during a test. Public things here, with 50-100 spectators in attendance. Each time I did what was necessary to rescue the situation. Second shots, highlighting what they do know, whatever it took to salvage that child's dignity in public.

I figure it's my job, since I was the one who put them up not fully prepared in the first place.

Saving the dignity of a child is a good thing in the long run.

 

[Kacey]

We also rotate their facing to one not normally used during practice. You cannot believe how much of a difference for forms and other technique demonstrations when you change their prospective or perception of start and stop or what they see.

I work them in all facings and around but sometimes beginners are only used to practicing or mostly practicing facing in one direction only.

I do that all the time in class - which is easier for me because my class meets in a different room on Monday than on Thursday, so it's harder for students to key off the same walls all the time anyway - but I have my students face all four walls and diagonals to teach them not to use the walls, so it won't matter what room they're in.

 

[jks9199]

I learned that one many years ago...

We were training outside, and many of us unconsciously oriented our movements in a few sets of the form we were working by the tree at one end of the park and the creek bed along another side... Then, for some reason, we turned around. (I think it may have been as simple as getting the sun out of our eyes... Or because we beat too deep a rut into the ground...) Quite a few of us suddenly got completely lost doing the set that we were clicking through without a problem before the turn!

Today, I've been known to have students change their start direction several times, start forms in the middle, do them backwards... All in an attempt to get them to actually look at the form -- and to make them rely on visualizing an opponent, NOT the wall!