But what I wanted students to do to prepare for the exam was not answer a bunch of questions that makes science look like all science is about is sitting around memorizing a bunch of disconnected facts. What I wanted to know when writing this study guide were these three things:
1) Did students understand what mastery looked like? (The "What it looks like if I've got it" column)
2) Could students, through determining what mastery looked like, determine if they have really mastered it or not? (The "I'm at a 9/not at a 9" columns)
3) Could students determine the next steps to fixing their knowledge if they decided they had not yet reached mastery of an I can statement? (No column for this, but the in-class fix-it activity that will follow student completion of this form will consist of a mass knowledge-fixing-fest.)
I think this is much more valuable than having students sit around for a few days answering pages upon pages of questions (what I used to have them do when I first started out in the education biz). Bottom line, in studying for any final assessment of knowledge, students need to determine what they don't know and then figure out how they're going to know what they don't know. It's just part of students really owning their own learning - they have to own up to what they know and to what they don't - and commit to and come up with specific strategery concerning how to fix what's broken.
Edited to add: If you'd like a copy of the exam review above, you can access it here. You can download it as soon as you open it up. Enjoy!