Hmmm... I'm curious of the exact phrasing of the question on the Prevot exam, now. It doesn't sound like anything that was on my exam.

Allen

(I'm also curious who actually posed the question. It sounds like the sort of questions a member of an exam board poses, not to get an answer from the candidate, but to prove that while the canidate may be testing for Prevot, the examiner still knows more about arcane fencing actions than anyone else in the room. BS).

Hee hee hee. I don't think it was on the written exam, you're right. And I think Mark posed the question, which means it's not exactly BS, it's the kind of thing Mark contemplates when he thinks about fencing and what he thinks is important, from what I know after years of working with him. Sometimes I think he's an extra-terrestrial.

I wish I could remember the question. What bothers me is I knew the answer I've been with him too long.

I am not surprised it was Mark who asked the question (I suspected it). I do think that these sorts of questions, are, in a way, BS, especially on an exam. First, I don't think it's fair that someone can pose a question they might have spent a week constructing, and then expect a candidate to have an answer for it immediately (although I know that you answered quickly, you've worked with Mark for some time). Second, I don't think that an ability to build these constructs (or to solve them) is a good test of teaching ability.

It's situations like this that keep me from sitting for my Master's exam (Wendell Kubik is after me to test, though I suspect his primary motivation is to have more Fencing Masters in the USFCA that see things the way he does): getting some smart alec on the exam board that wants to prove how much he knows to the rest of the board, OR feels that since his own Board made life hell for him, he's going to do the same to the people he examines. It's arbitrary, capricious, and ultimately, discouraging to people who want to improve and test.

But (*sigh*) I know that a lot of people think that this is part of the game, whether you're sitting for a test in fencing, or defending your thesis in another discipline.

Allen

ps - thanks for the emails. They generated some introspection.

I agree, but I'd extend the idea to cover tests in general. I went to a seminar once in grad school about the function of the entire educational system as a form of gate-keeping--not a system for teaching people, but a way of posing hurdles so that you can restrict who gets certain privileges. The idea is not to let too many people get through, especially the kind of people you don't think deserve to get through--that is, People Who Aren't Like Us. It's a political process rather than a serious evaluation. The funny thing was, the seminar was being given as part of the process of gate-keeping, since the instructor was doing it as part of applying for a job at Penn.

Most tests of any sort are badly constructed. For example, the referee exam, at least the one I passsed. and more recent ones from my observation of more recent discussions of questions, is very bad, though the people who have passed it have an investment in saying that it is a good test. It MUST be good--they passed it, didn't they?

Also, the standardized tests we used to evaluate schools or evaluate students for college fitness are not constructed to detect good learners, either--they test a certain type of factual knowledge and a certain set of skills that are very limited. People have worked very hard on making those tests and they are based on research, but that doesn't mean the tests actually evaluate important understandings or abilities. It just means they correlate with a certain type of success.

I barely passed my test at Coaches College for sabre, because I was more interested in teaching my student something than in demonstrating I knew how to do what the judges wanted. This is normal for me. I'm contrary. However, afterwards when I passed, Ed Richards said "You didn't think we'd fail you after we watched you all week, did you?" In other words, I was already People Who Are Like Us before I took the test.

Which is kind of the position you're in--you're already People Who Are Like SOME of Us if Wendell Kubik is encouraging you to take the test; but since it's a political decision, you do run the risk of not passing--not because you're not an excellent coach, but because there are other reasons for giving the test.

And I'm not going to say "sad but true," because it's just a fact that tests are generally highly politicized.

Now I've written long enough that the paint has dried and I can move on to the next segment of wall in my study.

I don't recall the question, unfortunately.

It was on Paul Sise's Prevôt practical exam in epee (I was his student in all three weapons) about 6-7 years ago. My recollection is a bit fuzzy.

I think the original wording of the question wasn't clear. Paul got tangled up in trying to show how to teach what he thought he was being asked to teach. He asked for a restatement of the question, which was clear to me, but not to him in his befuddled/tangled state. He gamely continued on.

Eventually, having got himself tied up worse, he stopped the lesson and asked if _I_ knew what was being asked. I took over the lesson, and taught the action from the coach role.

I assumed Paul would swap roles once he'd gotten straightened out, but that didn't happen. Including with the follow-up alternative that was requested (again done with me in the coach role and Paul as student).

Paul was complimented during the critique phase for being willing to ask his student for assistance when his lesson broke down.

Not a shining example of the USFCA testing process in action.... Although it sounds like Mark's recollection is more generous towards Paul than mine.

I'd love to be reminded what the question actually was, if you can get it from Mark again.

-B

I'll ask Mark what the question was again--assuming he remembers it exactly.

According to Mark, after he simplified it: How would you teach your student to deal with the compound counter-time riposte?

That sounds about right for what the question would have been. It also sounds like it's a standard question from Mark when he's sitting on examination boards.

Note that when asked on the prevôt practical where I was the student it was during the epee portion.

-B