Limitless Learning

There are two major components of an evaluation: The method and the scale.

The method

Suppose you want to test speed, and the method is a 100 meter race on a tricycle.

Now, maybe as participants you have Usain Bolt (world’s greatest sprinter), a 7-year old, and a bunch of other people.

The results of the race are probably not going to be an accurate representation of the participant’s fitness. The 7-year old has experience riding the tricycle and may win the event. Usain Bolt’s long legs probably can’t pedal the tricycle effectively, but in a 100 meter foot race nobody has ever run faster. Is the 7-year old faster than Usain Bolt? Or is this method of evaluation of speed not an accurate test? Who’s to say speed on a tricycle isn’t as important as running speed?

Society has placed more value on running due to it being something humans have done for a long time, whereas a tricycle is a somewhat new invention and designed for children. This isn’t the point though; the point is that the results and applicability of a test is dependent on the method of evaluation.

Specific methods of evaluation are inherently limiting. There’s no use trying to design a perfect test of speed because there isn’t one. Is the faster person the one who can run 1500m the fastest or 100m? Depends on the race.

The scale

The scale is also vitally important and must fully reflect the full range of abilities. If gold medals were given out in the Olympics to everyone who had a sub 10 second time in the 100 meters, there would be multiple gold medal winners.

Instead, the race scale is time, which accurately differentiates between the top-performing athletes.

In university, we don’t have an objective measurement such as time to determine intelligence and learning.

Instead, the percentages (out of 100) of all the methods of evaluation (tests, assignments, etc.) are summed to obtain a final grade or percentage. The weight of each method of evaluation is pre-determined, thereby limiting the professor in the ways they can evaluate a student’s progression or aptitude.

Limitless learning

Now what if we took away the limits for one method of evaluation for every class? Something that would make learning… limitless?

Imagine you were able to showcase what you’ve learned in any communicative medium. Better yet, it could be any idea that you felt was important to the particular class. So you could write an essay, deliver a presentation, make a video, conduct an interview, draw a picture, write a song, etc.

The topic could be anything the class made you think about! You could connect the relevance of the class to current events, explore deeper issues that you felt passionate about, think of hypothetical solutions to problems, or even a research report if that’s your thing. Anything you could imagine you could do.

There would be no limit on the amount of collaborators, so if you enjoy working in groups; no problem. The point would be to be thinking about things in greater depth and asking yourself questions like, “why is this important?” It would be a chance to reflect on what you had learned and leave your imprint on the course.

Everyone in the class would contribute a project (either alone or in a group), which would be shared among your colleagues. After viewing all of the projects, students would be required to submit a reflection (any medium you want) of what stood out to them.

Limitless learning projects would not only allow a greater depth of learning and reflection, but you would get multiple perspectives of the class. Part of a student’s own personality and being would be tied to the projects; therefore, you would actually get to know your colleagues in greater depth. Maybe if you liked a particular person’s work you could ask them to collaborate in the next class you had together.

There would be no pre-determined weight for grade percentage for a project. It wouldn’t even have to be incorporated into the mark breakdown at the beginning of term.

There would be no limit on the way it could affect your grade. You could go from an F to an A+ (now I’ve got your attention). Or you could go from an A+ to an F (now I’ve lost you). It would be up to the professor to assess the quality of the work and give an according grade.

Things that would be rewarded are: creativity, innovation, depth, and the ability to effectively communicate ideas. A superficial understanding of the course would be penalized. If there was a dispute over a grade, the student could get signatures of a percentage of the class (depending on size) that agree with their interpretation and launch an appeal. The appeal could then go before a panel of appointed professors in that particular field and the issue would get resolved.

Logistically, I would have limitless learning replace final exams. The time immediately after the conclusion of a class should be spent reflecting and creating, not cramming.

All tests and assignments would be done within the confines of the class schedule. The burden on students would not increase, but simply their time and energy would be redirected in a more productive way. I would be ok with the first and second year of university having final exams and then in third and fourth year classes it switches to limitless learning.

Maybe you like the idea; maybe you don’t. I hope you at least question the very foundation by which students are evaluated. University needs to move towards evaluation methods that are true to life. We need to be rewarding creativity and giving students the evaluative medium to freely express themselves.

The evaluation aspect of university should contribute to learning, not just testing what you’ve already learned. It’s time to change the archaic ways of university evaluation and dream of something different.

When have you ever asked what a student what they enjoyed most about their university experience and the answer been “exams”? Never.