Slashdot Mirror
IT Literacy Test
crumley writes "The Educational Testing Service just announced a new
test that is designed to measure information technology literacy. The test is supposed to measure the ability of students to use software to solve problems, and not just how to use particular programs. So has anyone out there taken a test like this? Did it seem to measure critical thinking and problem solving skills?"
one wonders how in two hours one can truly test someone's compentency when most projects requires at least 2hours to determine the source of the problem
I make my face look like this and concerned words come out.
Take the test but ya be warned: Failing even one question will result in a one year suspension of your Geek Licence.
They got the URL wrong - of course if you can't figure out how to fix it, you fail the literacy test. anyway it's a slash, not a backslash. (If you can't tell those apart, that's an automatic fail, too.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Whoever designed Slashdot's IT colorscheme fails!
While this is a good measurement of progress for our current interface and will be useful to measure the average worker. I expect it to be hopelessly interface dependent. There is more than one good and useful GUI or TUI (is there another name for a text only UI?)
...it's pencil & paper based!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
... but a test like this seems long overdue. I can't tell you how irritated I get when some new snotnose paper-MCSE comes strollin into my office thinking they know everything. If the test is accurate, fair, and relevant, I might consider it as part of the candidate screening process when hiring new IT workers.
bash: rtfm: command not found
When we were kids we had MAN this and MAN that. Now you whippersnappers have your fancy F1, and ICT literacy assessments. We didnt even have F keys and we had to flip switches both ways, in the snow!
Now get off my lawn j00 l33t whippersnappers!
and something about an onion on my belt
Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the
Question 1:
File Edit View Favorites Tools Help.
What does this mean?
Question 2:
What is that little X thingy in the upper right hand panel?
If you can answer these questions correctly, you're technically competent. If not, you have a bright future as a technology patent examiner.
Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.
Back in 1999, I was a chemical engineer looking for a change of pace. Purdue was desperate for computing folks, so they offered a program called Information Systems and Technology Eduction Program.
The entrance exam was a test that determined your ability to think logically and break down the wholes into their parts with appropriate linkages. It included block diagram puzzles and other assorted logic statements and questions. Not a single line of code anywhere in it (that would have defeated the purpose). I took the test, did well, and was hired.
So, these things have been around for quite a while, at least since 1999.
I was going to respond to a comment by someone else, but nothing previously posted merited a response of any sort (with the possible exception of the bitter guy who seems to hate ETS).
Personally, from a psychometrics point of view, which is something I have a more than passing interest in, ETS is incredible. They have data sets that are invaluable, and have done a lot to further the field of testing. Yes, they do make a lot of money, but I can say that they also earn that money.
If you think otherwise, consider it this way--for every test that they publish there are literally thousands of hours of research, testing, and retesting that have been done. Those doing this work need to be paid, and they typically demand fairly generous salaries (IRT analysts aren't that common, and certainly earn their pay).
Now, that said--wait a few years before you spend a ton of money on this one. That time is critical in making absolutely certain that the test really predicts success or ability. In a few years, we'll know.
"We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
Many are familiar with the often frustratingly cryptic interview questions from Microsoft and others... my favorite (which I would certainly use if I were running a support department):
"You come home and flip the switch, but the lights don't come on. Describe in as much detail as you can how you would go about fixing the problem."
Most people I've asked respond with "replace the light bulb." While that might be the problem, I think the first thing you should do is try the switch again. Maybe you didn't flip the switch all the way, or you hit the wrong one.
The point is that it's a problem solving experience - and not just in technology. It doesn't require expertise in Microsoft Word. It doesn't take a techie to know this stuff. You can measure a person's aptitude for logic, problem-solving, etc. without ever testing specific examples of those skills. That's what I really like about that question. Hopefully, the ETS exam will take this perspective when developing such tests.
What a useless thing to test. If you think logically and can break problems down, anything in operating computers simply comes down to Googling, reading, and thinking logically. This is about as useless as just a plain old IQ test, SAT, or any other standardized "bubble" test in assessing future work/educational performance. In fact, I bet an IQ test would be just as effective in this situation. My guess is that it is simply knowledge based, not action based (wasn't willing to drudge through ETS's corporate "Yeah us!" language). ETS should take a hint from Cisco. Their tests are difficult and actually ("GASP!") test performance in real world situations in solving real world examples and problems using real Cisco gear.
I'm the network admin for a school. I've been doing this for seven years and have been teaching computer classes for five. I teach the 7th grade how to do simple programming in LOGO. They learn the concepts of loops, variables, functions, etc. They learn how to take a problem, break it into parts and come up with a program to solve the problem. They also learn a bit of computer history and how to count and do simple math in binary. I believe I'm the only one doing this in my area.
I deal with a number of people in my position in other schools. Without fail, the computer "literacy" classes in those schools is training in Microsoft Office. They're just training kids to use a particular version of a particular product from ONE company. They're not teaching them the concepts behind a modern word processor, they're training them how to click buttons in Word.
When I started this job, I thought education was all about teaching people how to think and solve problems. I was wrong!
I'm fortunate at this job in that I'm pretty much free to use whatever solutions get the job done. 80% of the machines here are Linux based terminals (using LTSP). I'm also fortunate that I won the old teaching concepts vs. training argument with the administration. I'm free to teach the computer literacy class however I wish.
To answer your question....I took ETS's CS Subject AGRE 4 years back after completing my Bachelors....and found it pretty interesting.
The exam webpage (no time to dig it up) lists a few CS categories that they'll test on, and happily, these include all the core areas of CS. From memory, the list goes roughly as follows:
Formal Languages and Automata Theory
Algorithms
Languages and Compilers
Computer Architecture
Logic
Databases
All questions were multiple choice like the regular GRE test (the pattern has changed since), but I liked the fact that they focussed on the "core" CS subjects, which every Bachelor's CS course should cover.
New buzzwords like "IT" frighten me....hope they continue to adhere to fundamental knowledge than buzzwordish software/peripheral areas.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
My carefully cultivated bullshitting skills... now rendered useless!!!
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
I'm the network admin for a school. I've been doing this for seven years and have been teaching computer classes for five. I teach the 7th grade how to do simple programming in LOGO
People are still teaching LOGO? Holy 1982 Batman! Do they use a mouse to move the turtle nowadays?
Part of the problem with computing these days is the lack of basic education that the users have about computing in general. There are many people that believe that the CD-ROM drive is a cup holder, that Microsoft is everything (how many users have you seen say that "Microsoft isn't working?" Incredible), don't know anything about the dangers of the Internet and properly securing their computers (i.e., installing a firewall, protecting themselves from viruses and malware by using anti-virus and anti-malware tools, and using Firefox or an alternative to Internet Exploder), don't know about files and folders, or other basic movements with a computer, and faint at the sight of having to learn anything that is more complicated than moving a mouse around and clicking an icon (command lines are a great example). I would love to see a required high-school or college test that tests on all of the basic computing ideas and tasks, plus a little more. Unfortunately, many high schools and colleges have already implemented MS-centric "computer competency" requirements that test on nothing more than how to use MS Office and Windows; they test on specific applications, not about how to use computers per sé.
Am I saying that all of these people need to be tested on writing shell scripts, C programming, configuring ipfw/iptables, and compiling a kernel? Of course not! I'm just saying that I believe that all people using a computer need to be eduacted about the responsibilities and risks of having a computer, and all of the things needed to do in order to protect yourself. We all have to take driver's education and driver's training before we even step foot into a car, because we know the responsibilities and dangers of riding a car. When we get our cars, we have to learn how to maintain it, too. So, how come most users expect that their computers are magical boxes that don't need to be maintained or taken care of? The computer is a powerful multipurpose tool that can be beneficial when used correctly, but can also be a weapon (or zombie) if used incorrectly.
It's hard to know much about this test until we see it. Tests in general are measurements based on a body of knowledge. Maybe it's good, maybe it's not. Damning tests because they seem unfair is silly. Measurements are referential. Some have bad reference points and therefore can't measure very well. Some can, some tests age and become useless, some are good in specific areas. Without the knowledge of the test questions and the criteria for them, comments will likely be specious.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Our society has gotten far to hung up on testing as a silver bullet. Tests are just attempts to measure something, exactly as a ruler measures length or a scale measures weight. But tests such as the one in the article are, due to their nature, far less accurate or precise.
I see the introduction of yet another test as a poor substitute for one on one personal interviewing of the test subject. They are looking for a quick fix, one that is not people intensive when the fact is, people are best able to evaluate these complex abilities and skills, so long as they take sufficient time in doing so.
This is just like "No Child Left Behind". Instead of investing in the people, in that case teachers to work with students, a battery of standardized tests are introduced as a substitute. Yet, there is no validation of the testing against its objective, while we entrust our decisions to those very tests.
That is the biggest issue here as well. We are attempting to replace human judgement with supposedly objective testing, when it is precisely the complexity of that human judgement that is called for.
If I say I licked that test, and it was the Command Line Interface Test, do I get in trouble?
Reality is all that stuff that doesn't care if you believe in it or not.--Solomon Short
If you had taken/seen the computer-based GRE, you would know ETS went out of its way to make a platform-independent test environment. The word processor, for example, had some functions common to MS Word, but not all of them were. It did not superficially resemble Word, Emacs, or any other text editor I'm familiar with.
Live free or die
It's easier to test for incompetency than for competency.
A company I worked for got so many liars applying for jobs that we made these rediculous little tests to give people. Here's a sample question from our C test:
Or for electrical engineers:
I thought these tests were a waste of time. I think I said something like, "If someone is breathing they'll pass it." Then I saw how many people who claimed "expert" on their resume failed the liar's test. Weeding out the liars left us with a much smaller pool of candidates.
I am continually amazed by the number of my fellow college students who can barely read. It has made me extremely cynical about college because a solid 2/3 of college students in all but the most selective schools are both cheating and/or functionally illiterate. I wish I was exaggerating but I am not.
This is what is making me want to jump ship and get a job instead because If I have one more group project where my group consists of people who are just in college because they are supposed to be I am going to just say fuck it and start a business which is probably what I should have done.
If 4 years of college costs about 100k on the average (including living expenses) then I think I would be a lot better off if I had just been handed 100k at 18 for a business or a property investment.
People I know who score higher on ETS tests tend to be smarter than people I know who score lower on ETS tests.
Or they cheat better.
Or they have money to spend on preparation classes.
Or they're white.
Either way, the ETS tests can very actively tell admissions counselors which students are the the wealthiest white cheaters who are not totally stupid.
paintball