One of the interesting things about teaching an engineering class is that it’s usually really straightforward to check whether a solution to a problem is correct.1 Most students don’t take the time to do this, though.
To help build this habit, I started implementing a feedback loop into exams by requiring students to not only solve a problem, but also demonstrate that it’s correct using an independent calculation or approach.
I want to share a few observations why I like this.
-
Students get really engaged in exam problems. The first time I tried this, I couldn’t believe the level of emotion I saw on paper. On the problems where I include the feedback loop, I saw things written at the bottom of their solution ranging from “!!!!!!” when they proved they got it correct, to a perplexed, hand-drawn :-/ when things obviously aren’t working out.
-
It trains them to always verify whether their work is correct or not. Students immediately know how well they did. In a sense, I think this leads to a type of self-reliance. They’re not at my mercy to know their grade–they already know how well they understood the material.
-
Exam performance is much better. Students catch more mistakes, more quickly. I love seeing that a student caught a massive mistake which might have cost them significantly otherwise.
-
Exams are more efficient to grade. The feedback step often gives insight in diagnosing problems in the solution. Sometimes, while the student may not have time to re-solve the problem after realizing a mistake, they will point out where things went wrong and why. They’re doing my job for me.
At the end of the day, knowing how to know when you’re right is a key skill for a practicing engineer. The more we can embed notions of ethics in even basic material, the closer we come to producing excellent, reliable engineers.
-
Your mileage may vary in other disciplines. In statics, though, we can always verify equilibrium from any vantage point. ↩