The most dangerous people are often those who think they know the right answers but don’t.
The broker who just knows the stock has nowhere to go but up.
The doctor who assures patients that a popular arthritis drug is safe.
The nuclear power plant manager who “knows” the valve should turn right. I mean left. Whoops.
One of the reasons allegedly educated people turn out this way is the multiple-choice test. Most everyone who has been to school since about 1945 has taken one of these tests. And if they don’t know the answers, they simply guess.
Even if they know less than half of the answers, they can often get a passing grade using the process of elimination. Weed out A, B and D as unlikely answers, and the correct answer must be C. Right?
“It’s teaching people to gamble,” said James Bruno, 64, a professor at the University of California in Los Angeles.
Bruno has spent 15 years on a mission. He would like to put an end to the traditional multiple-choice test. He has developed a way of rephrasing questions so that test-takers can no longer just guess.
His method measures both knowledge and confidence. It reveals what people know. And what they don’t know. And the all-too-dangerous combination of what they think they know but don’t.
Here is a sample question that reveals how the test works: A crude version of which device was invented in China in A.D. 200? A) Seismograph. B) Crossbow. C) Hourglass.
Before marking A, B or C , you must indicate how confident you are in the answer:
1) I am sure. (If you are wrong, you get a penalty. If you are right, you get a high score.) Now answer: A, B, or C.
2) I am partially sure. (If you are wrong you get a penalty. If you are right, you get a lower score) But you get to put down two answers and only one of them has to be correct. So choose among these combinations: A or B. B or C. A or C.
3) I don’t know. No penalty. No reward. Confess your ignorance and hope you can do better on the next question.
A sure way to “fail” this test is to confidently answer incorrectly. One goal is to identify people who think they know more than they do. Another is to help test-takers learn from their mistakes.
Denver-based Knowledge Factor Inc. has patented Bruno’s work. The private company, founded in 2000, has 19 employees and less than $1 million in revenues.
Education is too focused on getting students to pass tests as opposed to getting them to actually learn, says Knowledge Factor CEO Patrick Engstrom, 60.
“We want you to tell the truth instead of having to guess or lie on the test,” Engstrom said. “If the outcome is learning, then we need to get rid of the guessing.”
His clients are corporations, law enforcement agencies, health-care groups and other organizations where misinformation can have serious consequences.
His company links its online tests to Web-based information. Students who do not pass are directed to the information they need to learn and can try again.
“By taking this test, you have self-reported that you don’t know this information,” Bruno said. “You don’t pass, you don’t fail, but you go home and study.”
John Spahn, 46, a patrol officer with the Calhan Police Department, recently took tests designed by Knowledge Factor while studying for his police credentials at Arapahoe Community College.
Spahn is no stranger to testing. He has degrees in aerospace engineering and computer science. He said he became a cop because he wants to design software to manage police reports.
“It’s an effective learning tool,” Spahn said. “Without a doubt.”
Unfortunately, there may be too much inertia in public education for this testing method to catch on quickly, Engstrom said. Still, Knowledge Factor hopes to change the world, one test at a time.
“A consultant once told me, ‘I’m sure glad you guys didn’t have this when I was in school,”‘ Engstrom said. “It would have forced me to do the work.”
P.S. The answer to the question above is A, Seismograph. I am sure.
Al Lewis’ column appears Sunday, Tuesday and Friday. Respond to Al at denverpostbloghouse.com/lewis, 303-820-1967, or alewis@denverpost.com.
