It's not just that it's easier to grade, closed book exams actually have a useful purpose IMO. In some classes there are a core set of ideas that are extremely important to understand and a much larger set of application concepts. Because tests require memorization it is much easier to focus only on the core ideas whereas homework or projects that did this would be frowned upon for being "too easy."
I've had this especially happen with finals, like my Differential Equations final where I managed to get all the concepts of the entire semester onto a single page when studying. I had a lightbulb moment where I realized the important parts of the class were really simple, it's just all the twists and challenges about application made it seem more complicated.
Similarly I got mad at a grad teacher recently when he would not make our last lecture a review because according to him we shouldn't need "hand-holding." It ticked me off because a day to summarize what we've learned over several months seems like a smart idea to me. I guess I feel like tests can be similar, a way to filter out things that are taught that are good to learn, but not as important as other things. Kind of like when a teacher says, "If you leave this class and only remember a single thing I want it to be this."
On the other hand I see tests not working for some people. I have a close friend who has memory problems. She is so frustrated by college because due to her memory her application of the classes is completely different to how she is tested.
> Similarly I got mad at a grad teacher recently when he would not make our last lecture a review
Huh. A graduate course that ended with a review would feel really weird to me. I've never seen one or heard of one, and when taking a course never asked for a review, or saw a classmate ask for a review. (My direct experience is with graduate courses in mathematics at three universities on in Mexico, one in Canada and one in the US.)
Edit: I just realized I'm not sure if the phrase "grad teacher" means a teacher of a graduate course, if not, disregard my comment.
yeah I meant teacher of a grad course, and I should probably give a better explanation, it wasn't so much about a class not having a review as the teacher's attitude. Also it was a computer science class, being both a comp-sci and math major I know in computer science reviews are far more useful, especially in this particular class, a distributed systems course that was a general requirement, covered tons of topics (the book was closer to a dictionary than a textbook), and no one really understood what was taught.
The thing is that any speaker will tell you that if you want to teach someone something you should tell it to them three times - intro, actual discussion, and conclusion, so I view a last day study session as the conclusion part, making it a useful teaching tool. I totally understand that graduate students should be able to learn on their own and not need something like that, but I still think teachers should keep an open mind and try to teach their students as well as they can.
However our teacher told us several times, in kind of an arrogant manner, he wouldn't have the review because otherwise he would be "holding our hands." He didn't have the attitude that it's a tool, he didn't ignore it, instead he looked down on it like if you want a review then you're stupid. This guy constantly used us being grad students as an excuse not to teach us, he would expect us to know entire classes that were never required, never taught, and not prerequisites, simply because we were grad students. We actually had a project worth half the class that centered on a major networking project when the entire class had no networking experience. The whole class was miserable, we learned nearly nothing, and then he curves tons so we pass and he doesn't look so bad. I just hate the attitude that a teacher's job isn't to teach, but instead to read the book to the class. I encountered that with all my required classes in grad school while the electives were amazing with teachers who were extremely challenging but at the same time actually taught us enough to deal with the challenges.
I've had this especially happen with finals, like my Differential Equations final where I managed to get all the concepts of the entire semester onto a single page when studying. I had a lightbulb moment where I realized the important parts of the class were really simple, it's just all the twists and challenges about application made it seem more complicated.
Similarly I got mad at a grad teacher recently when he would not make our last lecture a review because according to him we shouldn't need "hand-holding." It ticked me off because a day to summarize what we've learned over several months seems like a smart idea to me. I guess I feel like tests can be similar, a way to filter out things that are taught that are good to learn, but not as important as other things. Kind of like when a teacher says, "If you leave this class and only remember a single thing I want it to be this."
On the other hand I see tests not working for some people. I have a close friend who has memory problems. She is so frustrated by college because due to her memory her application of the classes is completely different to how she is tested.