In theory, the aim of the examination is to reveal one’s ability in a specific subject. In practice, expectations about what is to be expected on the exam are often not very clear. In fact, this lack of clarity has some students taking the test complaining about being “misunderstood.” Even those who are clear about what is expected usually find themselves surprised by the questions on the theory test. This makes the process of learning harder and, in turn, can lead to a false sense of confidence (since one hopes that one will get a correct answer).
To remedy this situation, the university establishes a set of expectations for every student taking the expectancy theory exam. In this manner, both students and teachers are working towards the same goal, which is a healthy testing environment. Aside from making sure that test-takers understand what they are going to be testing, expectancy theory also helps to keep motivated test-takers from giving up too soon or quitting before the end of the examination period.
Although it may sound counterintuitive, the expectations in the expectancy theory exam are actually relatively easy to understand. According to expectancy theory, students should expect to be able to understand the theories on hand. They should also be able to deduce theorems by themselves. Furthermore, they should be able to apply the concepts by drawing correct inferences from the given evidence. Finally, they should be able to draw conclusions about the future course of action based on the answers given in the given questions.
The importance of expectancy theory cannot be underestimated. It has become a staple in modern education systems. In fact, many educational systems throughout the United States and Europe actually incorporate expectancy theory into their own philosophy and teaching methods. For example, both the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Oxford University (OUP) include expectancy theory as one of the basic concepts they use in their curriculum.
There are numerous benefits to incorporating expectancy theory into exams. One is that it helps students identify weak areas in their learning that they may not have otherwise noticed. For example, if students fail to adequately analyze the arguments of the philosopher they are studying, they may fail the expectations test. By seeing how these arguments are developed and how weak they are, students can learn how to develop a stronger argument for their answers. This becomes especially true whenever students fail to adequately analyze the theory they have been provided with.
Another benefit is that expectations theory also provides an excellent example of how to properly question a question. In this way, the student who is asked a question will already know the answer before being presented with it. This allows students to avoid being caught in a lie or being given an incorrect answer when the real answer is obviously obvious. By seeing how others have analyzed the argument and have answered the question correctly, students can also gain a deeper understanding of the theories they are being asked to analyze.
Implemented properly, expectancy theory can improve the quality of a test taker’s performance on any examination. In addition to helping students develop a proper understanding of the material being presented to them, it also helps them avoid being caught out by the examiner when the time comes to discuss any particular topic on the test. Although it is almost never a good idea to lie on a test, it is perfectly acceptable for a student to give false answers on an expectancy theory test. Doing so does not make them guilty of lying, but rather gives them a better understanding of what the test is asking them to look for. However, if the student does use the wrong answer on the expectancy theory test, then they must discuss their incorrect answers with the examiner and offer an explanation for what they did wrong.
