As a newcomer, I think trials are important. I think the test-givers need some kind of syllabus to select from to ask trialing students to demonstrate. That is a selection from a number of possible rudimentary things that could be built to demonstrate an understanding of concepts. While that sounds like more work, it only has to be a one-time collaborative work, to establish a menu. You all know what could go on such a menu, and that leaves students having a loose sense of what might be required, while still having a bit of a pop quiz feel.
Personally I'd like to see more than binary arithmetic concepts covered, but those are foundational. Regardless of the subject, a knowledgeable test-giver can ask the right questions around those subjects, to gauge the students' comprehension. Building is important, but I think an interesting test would be to give the student a build that is incomplete or missing a piece of logic, and ask them to make it work.
Just like in real life, there are some that just aren't good test takers, but can demonstrate their understanding in different ways. You don't have to stoop too low to accommodate them all- I think dropping the testing requirement is probably too far - but some tweaking of this system can make it better. If you're taking suggestions I'll be happy to help brainstorm
For example: if the test giver could paste a schema of some test build that's missing a few key components; ask the student to assess the problem and prescribe or build a solution. Demonstrating an understanding. I may not be the only one that sees this, but just like with school quizzes, there's often cramming and rote memorization of the required material, in order to pass; that is not an understanding, and the OP alludes to that and he's right. The few trials I've spectated these are exactly what I'm seeing in the students, not an understanding but just doing what is required. In my biased view I think younger people are more likely to behave in that way and not comprehend just why trials are important and why they are given. That's not fair to say of all young people, but I find it's typical. Maybe the trial system needs an overstated creedo that will make it clear to newcomers that the aim is to become proficient at the subjects, not just to get a pass to the bigger server. Often this sentiment is not realized until they're trialing. Maybe there's an opportunity to send newcomers to a F.a.q or post that makes this clearer -well before they get into taking tests. Maybe there could be a quiz plot that has a series of the incomplete circuits for the student to solve. We could all collaborate to make such a course.
Personally I'd like to see more than binary arithmetic concepts covered, but those are foundational. Regardless of the subject, a knowledgeable test-giver can ask the right questions around those subjects, to gauge the students' comprehension. Building is important, but I think an interesting test would be to give the student a build that is incomplete or missing a piece of logic, and ask them to make it work.
Just like in real life, there are some that just aren't good test takers, but can demonstrate their understanding in different ways. You don't have to stoop too low to accommodate them all- I think dropping the testing requirement is probably too far - but some tweaking of this system can make it better. If you're taking suggestions I'll be happy to help brainstorm
For example: if the test giver could paste a schema of some test build that's missing a few key components; ask the student to assess the problem and prescribe or build a solution. Demonstrating an understanding. I may not be the only one that sees this, but just like with school quizzes, there's often cramming and rote memorization of the required material, in order to pass; that is not an understanding, and the OP alludes to that and he's right. The few trials I've spectated these are exactly what I'm seeing in the students, not an understanding but just doing what is required. In my biased view I think younger people are more likely to behave in that way and not comprehend just why trials are important and why they are given. That's not fair to say of all young people, but I find it's typical. Maybe the trial system needs an overstated creedo that will make it clear to newcomers that the aim is to become proficient at the subjects, not just to get a pass to the bigger server. Often this sentiment is not realized until they're trialing. Maybe there's an opportunity to send newcomers to a F.a.q or post that makes this clearer -well before they get into taking tests. Maybe there could be a quiz plot that has a series of the incomplete circuits for the student to solve. We could all collaborate to make such a course.