Here was a sample question I recently reviewed:
You chose:?ÿD)
Correct answer:?ÿC)
This is not an urgent or seriously perplexing question, but makes me a little nervous about the syntax used in problem statements and whether I may not interpret them correctly by the their written intent.
This problem's problem, to me, is that I believe(d) that when they say that "the original monuments differ from the beaarings/distances recited", that "original monuments" are actually the original, called for monuments and that they "differ" from the bearings/distances by field measurement by some likely small number (but IMO wouldn't matter if it were a large number).
I also believe that the recited bearing/distance would never be more credible in determining the location of a property corner than finding the original called for monument, even if it were 10' difference.?ÿ I believe even a recognized blunder holds the found monument where it's found and makes note of it on the plat, field notes and/or report.
The explanation given for this 'correct' answer is:
The priority of calls helps the land surveyor choose the ??best? evidence when items such as Berrien [sic] distance conflict with others like area or monuments. Here, the conflict is between distance and artificial monuments. The artificial monuments should be held, but only if there is no other field evidence indicating the distance to be more reliable.
They say that the answer is based on the conflict being between "distance and artificial monuments", which seems irrelevant if they describe them as original monuments in the question.
Do I have to worry about the PS having questions like this that are stated ambiguously?
TIA
The wording "original monument" does not imply "undisturbed".
If you find a rebar with cap leaning and beside a utility box, and not fitting measurements as well as others, it may be the original to the subdivision, but not trustworthy.
Yes, the grammar of the question writer is always a sticking point with multiple-choice or T/F questions.
And, with the determination of care applied to grammar today, we are moving toward the time when any answer is acceptable.
E.g., the memorable quote: "it depends upon what the meaning of 'is' is."
Here was a sample question I recently reviewed:
A surveyor must _____ if he finds the original monuments to differ from the bearings/distances recited in the plat or deed.A)Hold the bearingB)Hold the distanceC)Hold the monument unless he believes the bearing/distance to be more credibleD)Hold the monumentYou chose:?ÿD)
Correct answer:?ÿC)
This is not an urgent or seriously perplexing question, but makes me a little nervous about the syntax used in problem statements and whether I may not interpret them correctly by the their written intent.
This problem's problem, to me, is that I believe(d) that when they say that "the original monuments differ from the beaarings/distances recited", that "original monuments" are actually the original, called for monuments and that they "differ" from the bearings/distances by field measurement by some likely small number (but IMO wouldn't matter if it were a large number).
I also believe that the recited bearing/distance would never be more credible in determining the location of a property corner than finding the original called for monument, even if it were 10' difference.?ÿ I believe even a recognized blunder holds the found monument where it's found and makes note of it on the plat, field notes and/or report.
The explanation given for this 'correct' answer is:
The priority of calls helps the land surveyor choose the ??best? evidence when items such as Berrien [sic] distance conflict with others like area or monuments. Here, the conflict is between distance and artificial monuments. The artificial monuments should be held, but only if there is no other field evidence indicating the distance to be more reliable.
They say that the answer is based on the conflict being between "distance and artificial monuments", which seems irrelevant if they describe them as original monuments in the question.
Do I have to worry about the PS having questions like this that are stated ambiguously?
TIA
The manner in which this question is written wouldn't (shouldn't) pass normal psychometric item criteria used by NCEES.
I've spent my share of time fighting over wording and answers to standardized test questions, winning a few and losing many, but convinced only once that I was wrong.
Here, the question describes the monument as "original" while the explanation of answer describes it as "artificial." That?ÿcould imply that monuments are of four types (Original artificial, Original natural, Not original artificial, or Not original natural.) Would different rules apply to different types? For example, would a 20-ton rock partially exposed by a tectonic upchug 20 million years ago and used 100 years ago as a property corner be treated differently? If said rock had been endowed 100 years ago with a brass disk crammed into a drill hole, would it shift from being a natural monument to an artificial one? Or would it become a previously unknown type, an Original natural-but-artificial-one, with a whole new set of rules of its own?
Does not being told that the monument is artificial and thus having to assume based on no evidence that it is artificial in order to get the answer right disqualify the question?
More importantly, just what field evidence involving bearing/distance would disqualify the monument? That has to be the standard for any rational explanation for the answer.
This post prompted me to set up an NCEES account and order the booklet of 50 questions from prior FS exams. The booklet is $13.95 and FedEx ground is $15.65. They should raise the booklet price to $29.95 to make it look like a better value.
As it is, it's not worth the price of shipping.
I don??t like the wording of the question nor the choices for answers. As worded, I believe almost everyone would choose answer ??D?, which we are told is incorrect.?ÿ
@mathteacher I think you're right that an original monument can be artificial, so that adjective in the reasoning they give for the answer is irrelevant.?ÿ I guess my issue might be more with the idea of finding an original monument and having any case where the bearing/distance would give a more credible actual location of the legal property corner.?ÿ @Bill93 's reply that it could have been an original (natural or artificial) monument that's clearly disturbed being a case where it might be be possible to reject it.?ÿ Even then, the actual location should not (IMO) be ascribed to the bearing/distance without other calcs from other nearby best evidence.?ÿ It'd bother me if NCEES would word something like this that I would get n answer wrong because I didn't assume a very narrow scenario.
Unless there are other reasons why one would accept a bearing/distance as more credible that I'm not aware of.
)Hold the monument unless he believes the bearing/distance to be more credible
Believes is a bit loose. It might sit better with folks if it said "has substantial evidence the position is less credible than the b/d."
@dave-o?ÿ
Indeed. Writing real-world questions is hard; space and time are limited, so wording has to be tight but reasonably simple. The writer has to know what knowledge he's trying to extract and that's where I think this one breaks down.
He gives three answer choices that are each absolutes while the fourth is is a conditional. To experienced test takers (in today's world, anyone under age 30 but past the third grade) that's a big hint that C will be marked correct. I would bet that the majority of guessed answers would be C. Experienced surveyors or well-read inexperienced candidates would not choose A or B but might well choose D, not expecting test-taking skills to be front and center on a professional exam, but aware of evidence that a monument has been disturbed or placed incorrectly, and also aware that errors in published descriptions occur as well.
So, to me, an old standardized test warrior who's both inflicted and suffered wounds, the artificial monument explanation does not justify the answer. The answer may represent best practice, but the problem needs to be written to fit the explanation or vice versa. Make the monument obviously artificial and movable, for example.
Questions like this prove how hard it is to both write the questions/answers and to gauge the knowledge of the test taker on a profession that has so many "yeah, but what ifs" in the scenarios.
@ric-moore "The manner in which this question is written wouldn't (shouldn't) pass normal psychometric item criteria used by NCEES."
Are these criteria available on the web? Or do you know of published criteria from organizations that are credible in the field of creating tests?
It??s can be a tough union to get into. ?ÿOops, I mean profession.
the artificial monument explanation does not justify the answer.
I believe what this alludes to; a natural monument is going to be difficult to move, or place, in the the wrong "spot", so it must be the call...
Placing an original, artificial monument in the wrong spot, doesn't change it's validity; but moving it does...
If an original monument, placed in the wrong spot is caught in time, before anyone really relies on it; then by all means, put it where it should be. But don't go moving original, undisturbed monuments, just to better suit your mood.
We were staking a house, and found one of the front corners off a couple of feet. It was in a curve, so we figured the original surveyor turned the?ÿ wrong deflection angle. We called them, they thanked us profusely, and everyone was happy; I even think we got a beer or 2 out of the deal. Circa 1977.
That might be a better explanation to the answer
May your corners fall in pleasant places...
Dougie
@ric-moore "The manner in which this question is written wouldn't (shouldn't) pass normal psychometric item criteria used by NCEES."
Are these criteria available on the web? Or do you know of published criteria from organizations that are credible in the field of creating tests?
I based my statement on many years of developing questions for the various state specific exams in CA and as one of the many engineers/surveyors who have helped in this capacity at NCEES.?ÿ In both cases, under the guidance of the psychometricians who specialize in criterion-based testing for high stakes examinations for licensing/certification.?ÿ This by no means makes me an expert and other than that guidance and oversight, I have not researched this myself on the web.?ÿ But I suspect published criteria would be readily available since the recognized examination vendors out there tend to publicize much of what they do.
Don't get me started.?ÿ University biology tests were all multiple choice.?ÿ Invariably, many of those would have three or four regular answers followed by NONE OF THE ABOVE which was followed by ALL OF THE ABOVE.?ÿ Too frequently the expected answer turned out to be ALL but that was not correct.?ÿ It couldn't be correct because NONE was above ALL.
