Madrid’s Practical Exam 2018 for Secundarias and Escuelas was published on September 11th. That was one of the points of my 1st question in the post Madrid 2018 Part 1A. It is also the second step towards a much-needed openness in the Competitive Exam. We really hope other Education Authorities follow suit.
My Congratulations to Madrid’s Education Authorities
I didn’t think I would be saying this, but here it goes…and it makes me happy. POPPIES would like to congratulate Madrid’s Education Authorities. This is a clear, much-needed step towards openness. And we hope others follow.
Madrid’s Practical Exam: 1st step towards openness
The first step towards openness, as I mentioned in the Problem with the Practical Exam in Madrid, was that the candidates could keep a copy of their exam. Being able to keep a copy of what you actually did is essential. Essential for you to see if you did as well as you thought you did. And essential to show that you did well. Hopefully, if this practice is continued, it will help candidates to pay attention to being clear, tidy, concise and to the point.
The second step towards openness in Madrid’s Practical Exam
No doubt that the publication of the exam is a further step towards the openness we are all demanding. There’s a little glitch in the exam, though, and I would like to comment on it. I wonder whether any of you has spotted it. It may just be due to the fact that we are using both English and Spanish in the exam. Particularly in the translations. However, the ” minor flaw” I have noticed concerns the questions on the text. The marks for the questions. Admittedly, it does not affect the text or the questions. Yet, if you are going to penalise candidates for mistakes, I would pay attention to things like this.
A general comment from some board members
Talking about mistakes. A former student who got a position this year and is a member of the POPPIES blog has mentioned to me what some board members told her about candidates in general. There were lots of spelling and grammar mistakes. Hence the importance of re-reading what you write. Write a bit less, revise a bit more. This should be your motto.
What should the third step towards openness be?
The obvious third step should be to publish the answer key provided to the panels or boards and the specific assessment criteria and penalisations. There are too many differences among the number of candidates who passed in each of the 21 panels. It’s hard to think that all the good candidates went to one particular panel and all the bad ones went to another.
Should POPPIES publish a “suggested answer key”?
For a while, I considered this option. But then, as those who know me know, I like to make you work and question yourselves. And I want to do the exam with my new candidates. So, I decided to send my feedback to those candidates who send me a copy of their exam. No answer key, but feedback or, if you prefer, LOA or A4L.
If you did the exam and did not send me a copy of what you did, or you did not prepare for the exam with me, I have a proposal. We can discuss the answers in the comments below. State the question you are answering. We can then analyse if it is right or wrong and why.
Petición a todas las Comunidades Autónomas
En aras de la claridad, de la justicia y de la equidad en los examenes de oposiciones a profesores, todas las Comunidades Autónomas deberían hacer públicos los exámenes una vez hayan sido realizados. También unos criterios de evaluación claros y precisos y las respuestas proporcionadas a los tribunales como esperadas. No hay ninguna razón para mantenerlos en secreto. No hay justificación para no hacerlos públicos. Así demostrarían que sí quieren seleccionar a los mejores preparados para la enseñanza. A quienes saben teoría, pero sobretodo saben escribir bien y enseñar y guiar a sus alumnos aún mejor.