> move towards homework and exams that can be marked by a computer rather than by hand...
Pretty much all of current homeworks and exams can be. It's called standarized tests, and I'd argue it's one of the reasons education sucks as much as it does.
Except from that one, where I think a move in opposite direction is desirable, I'd love for all the changes you mentioned to happen.
Multiple choice is not ideal... but at the very least we shouldn't be employing teachers to tick these papers by hand when a computer could mark the pupils' answers instantaneously .
To be honest I don't think anything can be done to the 'education system' that will drastically improve the results. The bottleneck lies with the children (and their parents) and their thirst for knowledge (or lack thereof), which is a reflection of the culture and values they grow up with.
But what we can do is save a boatload of money on costs.
there's software that almost every higher ed university uses in their lower division courses to administer homework electronically. it grades the homework for the instructor and populates a gradebook. it's pretty hands off.
as far as I know, they have packages like this for every lower division STEM class. I used this software as late as multivariable calculus.
I don't think "marked by computer" automatically means multiple choice "standardized tests".
English homework can't be graded by computer, but subjects like math, physics, and chemistry could conceivably be checked by computer. There'd be some details to work out, such as how to "show work", but it could work.
At least one (and almost certainly more) company pursuing this. The service WebAssign is used in almost every science class at my high school. 90% of homework is done (and graded) via the site. However, the lack of any "show-your-work" functionality sometimes limits teachers' ability to assist students.
There might be a way to make manual grading scale. Perhaps set up a cooperative system where students grade others' papers in return for grading of their own papers in another subject matter. By having a larger body of graders, you could have each paper viewed by several people, and it would check that the graders agree on its score (without communicating with each other or knowing how the other evaluated it).
It's just like using TAs, except with casting a much wider net, though a lot more details would need to be worked out.
Remember, you have the advantage that grading a paper is easier than writing one (in compsci terms, the former is in P, while the latter is NP-complete).
I actually find it a vastly superior format. You can rewind the bits you don't understand clearly, or when your mind wandered off. In a live lecture, you do not have that luxury. In order to get maximum value out of a live lecture, you need to pay 100% attention to everything as it is said, and 100% understand each thing as it is spoken. Two rather unrealistic expectations, especially when lectures are usually cumulative, building one topic on top of the understanding of another.
Questions are also probably better handled with an online (or offline) forum and office hours. At any rate, I was never overly convinced about the 'interactive' benefits of the lecture hall.
why not? There a much better uses of class time -- students asking questions or more engaging interactive activities. Just doing practice problems in class, where the professor is there to help, is a better use of class time than lecture.
Pretty much all of current homeworks and exams can be. It's called standarized tests, and I'd argue it's one of the reasons education sucks as much as it does.
Except from that one, where I think a move in opposite direction is desirable, I'd love for all the changes you mentioned to happen.