Wednesday, December 5, 2007

Further analysis of exam III

I know you're all dying to know how exam III broke down by question. Probably, you've been lying awake at night wondering what percentage of people answered multiple choice question 3 correctly, what percentage of people chose to solve problem 5, and what the average score on problem 4 was.

Wait no longer. Well, just a little bit longer.

The average was 82.33% (std. dev 23%) overall, which weighted the multiple choice and problems sections equally. The bonus question counted as one multiple choice question. There were 17 A's, 18 B's, 7 C's, and 4 D/F's. Clearly, this thing was too easy. :-)

The problems section had an average of 88.43% (std. dev 25%), while the multiple choice section averaged 72.1% (std. dev 23%). This disparity probably has something to do with the fact that I solved two of the exam problems in class the day before ...

Anyway. Here you are. Clicky-clicky for a larger plot.From this one, you can see more clearly that the problems section of the exam really pushed the average up. The multiple choice alone would have made for a somewhat disappointing result in the end.

Here is where I thought there were some interesting things going on. Question 3 on the multiple choice was by far the 'hardest', followed closely by numbers 5 and 6. Number 5 was on nuclear physics we had only covered days before, but numbers 3 and 6 were both conceptual, as was number 7, the next lowest. Broadly, the conceptual questions seem to cause the most trouble.

For the problems, no one seemed much harder than any other based on average score, but if you look at the number of people choosing to attempt each problem (recall you had to do 2 of 5 problems), then numbers 1 and 4 win in a landslide - the ones I did in class the day before.

Glean from this what you will, don't take it too seriously. I just think its good for me to look at these things and see if I can identify which questions/concepts in particular were troublesome, and whether that's something I can try to correct.

No comments: