I am puzzled. Earlier this morning I completed the quizzes for sessions 2 and 3 online, and I'll reluctantly admit that I bombed both. I went to class, participated each session thus far, read all of the required readings, and have even studied cognitive development before, but I got an even 50% on both assessments. And that is why I am puzzled.
Last week we discussed how phrasing can carry all sorts of connotations, and "puzzling" was one word that was brought up and discussed. While puzzles are typically thought of as being enjoyable in this day and age (not so much in Greek tradition), there seemed to be a pretty firm consensus that the word puzzling had negative connotations. That a student who was puzzled might feel lost and discouraged. That I could have saved hours of reading and received a similar mark through probability makes me question not just my capabilities, but the assessment as well. It was open book after all.
I don't think I am entitled to a good mark, and who knows, maybe I just picked a sloppy answer on each, dropping my mark significantly. Maybe it's me, but I found the phrasing of each question rather puzzling in itself, and the possible answers no better. The entire assessment seemed to fall in my Zone of Proximal Development. Perhaps I was simply functioning at a concrete operational level, without abstract and idealistic thought? What would Piaget say?
